Abstract

In using the colonial and dominant communities’ methods, we continue to keep ourselves colonised. We are already colonised if we think, behave and try to become like the colonisers. Hence decolonisation is necessary for the future of the self and the community. Adivasi Perspective emerges from the experiences of colonisation (both external and internal), marginalisation, lived experiences, shared values and world-views.  I would like to argue that there is need to integrate the dimension of  ‘spirit’ within the Adivasi Perspective. The separation of the Human, nature and spirit has led to the exploitation of the natural resources and marginalisation of the Adivasi belief systems. The creation stories shared by the Adivasis can be the basis of formulating an Adivasi Perspective. The theoretical position from the perspective of the Adivasis is aimed are challenging and critiquing the western (Colonial) forms of knowledge systems. The process of constructing an alternative narrative is a  liberating experience for the self and the community.

 Introduction

Adivasis in India have faced different forms of exclusion and marginalisation at the hands of colonisers and the dominant communities. They have lost their land, forest, water and resources. Their knowledge system is  not accepted as true and authentic. Their cultural practices and belief systems are ridiculed as backward and uncivilised. The colonisers and the dominant communities failed to understand that they  simply see, hear, feel, taste, and smell the world  differently (Meyer 2001: 125). Hence it become pertinent to articulate our stories and narratives from our, Adivasi Perspective. It is necessary to decolonise our mind, culture, world-view and religious belief systems. The knowledge derived from this epistemological premise is counter hegemonic, critiquing the western centric knowledge system. These counter stories are potent forms of resistance which are repeated and shared across diverse indigenous communities (Smith 1999: 2). The social, cultural and intellectual subjugation of the Adivasis/ Indigenous people/ tribes has led them to formulate their own liberative and anti- oppressive methodologies. It brings into theory the rich social and cultural heritage which was considered  primitive and backward. In order to formulate an Adivasi Perspective, it is important to critique the western centric knowledge based on separation of Human, Nature and Spirit. There is a need to see these entities  in constant interaction with one another. The relationship are  not just with people or objects, but relationships that are with cosmos, with ideas, concepts, and everything around (Wilson 2001: 177). The constant interaction among them can be found in our creation stories. In order to establish this, I have presented the Kurukh and Munda creation stories.

Research in has emerged as a colonial project to justify colonialism, racism and domination over other communities, particularly Adivasis and Indigenous People. It was an essential part of the colonisation process because it is concerned with defining legitimate knowledge (Smith 2008: 173). Sociology and the social sciences have developed as part and parcel of this historical project (Dos Santos 2014: 71). According to Linda Smith, “ Decolonizing it is about centring our concerns and world views and then coming to know and understand theory and research from our own perspectives and for our own purposes  (Smith 2008: 39). Similarly, the epistemologies of the South envisions a new processes of production and valorisation of valid knowledges, whether scientific or non scientific, and of new relations among different types of knowledge on the basis of the practices of the classes and social groups that have suffered, in a systematic way, the oppression and discrimination caused by capitalism and colonialism (Santos 2012: 51)[1]. Thus it gives authenticity to the knowledge acquired through experiences, which otherwise would not have been accepted as knowledge under positivism. This will consider the treasure of knowledge Adivasi/ Indigenous communities transmitted through oral traditions as knowledge. According to Akhup, “.. this knowledge enterprise (Perspective from Within) is positioned in a manner so as to transcend or move beyond assertions, as it strives to identify and carve out space of ‘listening and taking to each other’ while constantly connected to ground realities”  [emphasis mine] (Akhup 2015: 2). According to Bodhi & Jojo, amidst social struggle, effort towards knowledge production, epistemological reconstruction is bound to take place, and likely to deepen and strengthen the historical struggles of tribal/ Adivasi communities. The knowledge situated in ‘perspective from within’, is committed to a truth seeking enterprise that ‘waves of colonialism’ were bent on destroying (Bodhi & Jojo 2019: 15).

Marginalisation of Human-Nature-Spirits interaction

The western knowledge system is based on the separation of Human, Nature and  Spirits. They assumed that there is only one way of knowing and understanding the world. The idea of multiplicity and non-destructible relations is suggested by the concept of ‘Ecology’ (Santos 2016: 181). As this world is filled with diversity and multiplicities; multiple ways of imagining and conceiving the world, is nothing but natural. According to Burkhart, “Western knowledge  is propositional knowledge which is in the form of  ‘that something is so.’ It is the kind of knowledge that can be written down, that can be directly conveyed through statements or propositions” (Burkhart: 2004: 19). In the contrary Native Indian knowledge (non propositional) is based on direct awareness or acquaintance, and how-to knowledge or knowledge of how to do something (Burkhart: 2004: 19).  According to Cajete, “Native science strives to understand and apply the knowledge gained from participation in the here and now, and emphasises our role as one of nature’s members rather than as striving to be in control of it” (Cajete: 2004: 47). The perspective of Native science goes beyond objective measurement, honouring the primacy of direct experience, interconnectedness, relationship, holism, quality, and value. Its definition is based on its own merits, conceptual framework, and practice and orientation in the tribal contexts in which it is expressed (Cajete: 2004: 51). Adivasi/ Indigenous people present a different way of looking at the world. Their world-view reflects collectivity, interaction and interrelations.

The separation of Human, Nature and  Spirits has led to perceive social, cultural and religious activities as separate entities.   Hence, completely failing in understanding the cultural and religious values of the Indigenous People/ Adivasis in totality.  It delegitimized the other ways of knowing as savage, superstitious, and primitive (Akena 2012: 600). And made Indigenous peoples’ minds, intellects, knowledges, histories, and experiences irrelevant (Rigney: 1999: 113).  Devoid of interaction with other entities, the prevalence of spirits among the Adivasis was perceived as strange phenomenon. Its presence was considered as a marker of uncivilized and backwardness (Tylor 1872: 425). The world of the spirits was separated from culture and social and given a religious dimension. Different theories were proposed by the anthropologist to understand the spirits and its function in Adivasi/ Indigenous society. Tylor’s belief in the spiritual beliefs emerges from an intellectual need,- the desire for an explanation for the psychological phenomenon of life, sleep, dream and death (Lowie 1936: xiv). He posited that ‘animists’ understood the world childishly and erroneously, and under the influence of 19^th century evolutionism he read into this cognitive underdevelopment (Bird-David 1999: 68).

In contrast to the west who had the idea of Good- Bad, Heaven- Hell, God- Satan, Adivasi communities did not perceive the world in these binaries. Not relating to the world in these conception itself meant primitive and backward. ET Dalton writes, “I do not think that Oraons have an idea that their sins are visited on them either in this world or the world to come” (Dalton 1872: 256).  Their belief system was  considered as “Pagan doctrines and superstitions” (Dalton 1872: 256). This idea was taken forward by the Indian anthropologists conducting ethnographic studies among the tribes.  SC Roy writes, “… the Oraons present religion may be described as a system of animism or rather spiritism..”  (Roy 1928). The Christian missionaries too looked at the belief system of  the Adivasis from evolutionary and ethnocentric perspective.  They believed that the ritual performances at the Sarna (Sacred Grove) were the work of the Satan and similarly dancing at the Akhara (Dancing floor) was considered immoral. Hence the early converts were prevented from going to the Sarna and Akhara. L. Claeskens, a Jesuit missionary stationed are Lachragarh wrote “Some 10 minutes from the property lay a Munda village, named jatratoli. This village was altogether pagan, and this name had been given for their daily satanic dances and origies.”[2]

The marginalisation of the Naturalist (Human- Nature- Spiritual) perspective led to the emergence of a Humanist approach in the western philosophy, making Humans at the centre of knowledge. Nature (consisting of plants, animals, spiritual beings) was left out from the production of knowledge due to their lack of language and reason. The distinction between Humans and Nature has justified the domination of Humans over nature. This has also led to the development of religious belief system centred around divinized Humans, particularly males. According to Gurevich, in medieval times, ‘man thought of himself as an integral part of the world… His interrelation with nature was so intensive, and through that, he could not look at it from without; he was inside it’ (Gurevich 1992: 297; cited in Palsson 1996: 65). Tapper (1988) has argued that in hunting and gathering societies humans and animals engage in the ‘mutual production of each others’ existence’ (Tapper 1988:52; cited in Palsson 1996: 64). Among Amerindians of the Amazon, the notion of ‘nature’ is contiguous with that of ‘society’ (Århem 1996: 185). To the Makuna of the Colombian Amazon, all beings—spirits, humans, animals, and plants—participate in a field of social interaction defined in terms of predation and exchange (Århem 1996: 187).

According to the Adivasis, the world is made up of the mutual relationship and interaction between Humans-Nature- Spirit, diversity of knowledge and culture, communitarianism and multiplicity. The Nature- Man-Spirit Complex is explored by Vidyarthi in his study among the Malers of Santal Pargana (Vidyarthi 1963). Their ecological settings and many cultural experiences have developed a style of life, a type of Nature- Man- Spirit complex (Vidyarthi 1963: 179). However, his understanding of the spirit is that of fear and malevolent. He writes, “..supernatural fear wields a powerful influence in regulating social and political relations in the Maler villages (Vidyarthi 1963: 140).  In her study among the Hos in Singhbhum district, Hebbar observes, “It is this interconnectedness of the natural world with the spirit world, which distinguishes Ho philosophy towards their natural habitat from modern scientific understanding of forest as ‘resource’ or ‘matter’ valuable  only for its material worth and allows for a humbler relationship vis-a-vis the natural world (Hebbar 2003: 46). The natural environment is a dwelling place for many of their (Adivasis) deities and spirits (Xaxa 2014: 106). On the similar line, Descola emphasis on the necessity for humans to interact with non-humans on a daily basis, notably to ensure their subsistence, intersects with the possibility for them to endow these interactions with a multitude of diverse meanings (Descola 2013: 36-37).

According to Delueze, “Becoming can and should be qualified as becoming-animal even in the absence of a term that would be the animal become. The becoming-animal of the human being is real, even if the animal the human being becomes is not; and the becoming-other of the animal is real, even if that something other it becomes is not” (Delueze 2001: 238). The Mundas believe that humans can transform themselves into tiger, known as Horo-Kula (Human- Tiger). The shape-shift is accomplished with the help of a spirit known as the Bagocandi (Rosner 1982: 119). Individual Kurukhs/ Oraons sometimes visualize the more essential deities and spirits in the shape of human beings or animals (Roy 1912: 2-3). This shows that Kurukhs/ Oraons do not see the spirits as external being but part of their Being and cosmology. As they are treated like living beings, so it is possible to visualize them as human beings or animals. For the Munda, death does not end everything. Death ushers in a new life for that part of the man known as the Roa, the ‘shade’ that cannot die but lives on after death has separated it from the body. This spirit, or shade, becomes one of the Orabongako– the household spirits. It takes up its abode in the Ading, that inner chamber in a Munda’s house where none but the family members may enter (Rosner 1982: 209).

In the case of the Kurukhs, the election of the  Pahan (Priest) is believed to happen through the mediation of the ‘Chala Paccho’ (deity of the sacred grove). A person is blindfolded, who carries a Sal (Shorea Robusta) pole, to the other end is attached a ‘Sup’ (Winnowing Basket). People present there throw arwa rice on the sup. The person continues to walk blindfolded while people continue to throw arwa rice on sup. The house in which the person enters is elected as the next Pahan (Roy 1928: 8; Tirkey 2014: 34).  This knowledge has been acquired through experiences and passed down to generations through oral traditions, and in writing in contemporary times. This gives them a sense of belonging, who share a collective experience of origin and history. According to Ramdayal Munda, the purpose of the ritual of Sosobonga (Bhelwa Pujan or Prayer to the Soso tree), usually performed with the commencement of rice plantation during the Karam festival (August, September) is placing collectivity over individuality (Munda & Manki 2015: xix).  The paradigm of communitarianism differs from both orientalism and paternalism in that it rejects the radical separation of nature and society, object and subject, emphasising the notion of dialogue (Pálsson 1996: 65).

Kurukh and Munda Creation Stories

The idea that man invents his realities is not a new one; it is found in such diverse philosophies as the Mu’tazila of Islam and the teachings of Buddhism, as well as in many much less formal systems of thought (Wagner 1981: 5). The creation stories, folklores and folk-tales of different communities across the world are the earliest manifestations of the humans’ effort in understanding and explaining the world. According to Linda Smith, “…creation story explains the presence of people in their specific environment and on understandings of human behaviour as being connected to some form of external force, such as powerful spiritual beings, ‘gods’ or sacred objects” (Smith 2008: 47). Unfortunately, these treasures created by earliest human beings are relegated into a dark room as myths, mythologies, folk culture, oral traditions, little traditions, etc. These were considered as unscientific and became indicators of pre-modern, savage, traditional society. However, these could be considered as the earliest work on ontology (nature of the world) and epistemology (making sense of what you know). Non-western civilisation or even pre-modern western ones, were not seen as complete systems of conceptualisation of the an alternative world, but as more or less exotic ways of accounting for the state of a world conceptualised and established by the west (Descola 2013: 33). This led to not only non recognition and acceptance of the knowledge system of the Adivasis/ Indigenous people but also a denial of their existence.

Kovach talks about the conversational method as a means of gathering knowledge found within Indigenous communities.  The conversational method is of significance to Indigenous methodologies because it is a method of gathering knowledge based on oral storytelling tradition congruent with an Indigenous paradigm  (Kovach 2019: 124). Adivasi communities have the tradition of telling stories at different festivals and rituals. During the Sarhul festival, the creation story is retold by the Pahan while offering the sacrifice. At the Karam festival, the Pahan or the elders of the community narrate the Karam stories. In Hawaii there is a tradition of story telling known as ‘ha’mo’olelo’ ( Kaomea 2001: 28). Wilson has suggested methods like storytelling, focused group discussion, personal narrative for the research with Indigenous communities (Wilson 2001: 178). It is important to focus on the stories which are repositories of knowledge in the Adivasi/ Indigenous communities. These stories in the forms of creation stories, songs, folk-tales, folk-stories etc., reflects the world-view of the communities. These are  manifestations of their conception about the world. I would like to further elaborate on the Adivasi  perspective, deriving for the Kurukh and Munda creation stories.

According to the Kurukh creation story[3] :

The sat-pati-raji [4], O Dharmee, is covered by water. In the beginning, Jammudeep[5]  in Sat-pati-raji was deluged with water. There was no trace of the earth. The whole heavenly court assembled for a consultation. “How shall we make the earth? Jammudeep is fully deluged. How we fashion the earth?” they discuss. The old mother[6]  says, “If you make Jammudeep, then only human beings (little children) will inhabit.” The mother had kept a maid-servant in order to massage her body. In the process of massaging the body, some dirt came out of her body, then she said, “O Dharme, make a golden Kilkila[7].  It will go to patalpur in search of seeds of the earth.” That day Dharmes started making the Kilkila bird of gold and of silver[8].  When he had finished making it she said, “O Dharme, you well made it. Now put life into it.” Then he put life into it. Then she said, “Now it is given a soul. But if it is left just like that, it will break. Such a baked soul, if it knocks against something will be broken to pieces like cooking pots. You must put into it blood also. Then if it knocks against something it will be able to say, ‘it pains!’” Then he put blood into it. It started singing kilkil-kilkil and said, “You gave me life. Now give me means and wisdom[9]  (to live) in Jammudeep.” Then Dharmes said, “Go to Patalpur in the town of Dhurrapur  to Landu-Gandu  in order to bring the seed of the earth.” Kilkila said,”O Dharme, if you send me to Dhurrapur[10] then give me your blessing, lest in my errand I die somewhere.” In Dhurrapur Landu-Gandu[11] are the masters of the earth. They eat mud and excrete mud. You must ask the seed of the earth from them.” That day kilkila went up in the sky, then plunged itself in the sixteen currents of the seven seas, went down to Patalpuri. Landus asked, “Kilkila, Why have you come? “Because Dharmes sent me in order to get the seed of the earth.”  said, “How will you take it? If you take it in your mouth, the seed will fall down as you fly singing kilkil-kilkil. Hold it with your nails and take.”When Landu gave the seed, Kilkila held the seed with its nails and returned; it bought the earth in its nails. Kilkila flew back to Jammudeep, to our earth. Dharmes said, “Did you bring the seed?” “I have brought it Dharme.” Kilkila gave the seed to Dharmes. Now Dharmes, in order to plant the seed, started churning the mud in the seven seas, sixteen currents. Then the seven seas became muddy. The earth got established. The Sat-pati-raji got formed (Lakra 1984: 35-36).

In the Munda Creation  story[12], Singbong and First Mother started contemplating over creating the earth. They were not sure whom to approach and who would be able to help them in the creation of the earth.

First Mother said,

My dear, there must be

My dear, there may not be

Creatures of water

Living in the oceans

Swimming in the water

Hiding in  the mud

Drinking only water

Eating only mud

 

We’ll send them as a messenger

We’ll dispatch them as go-betweens

They will bring soil for us

Let us convince them

Let us counsel them

Let us ask them

Let us inquire them

 

First, they approached the fish, Sundi Genger, and said,

 Dear Fish children

Sundi and Genger

Are you there or

Aren’t you there?

Please open the door

Please unlock the shutter

Let us talk about something

Let us discuss something

Fish (Sundi- Genger) said,

We surely are home

We surely aren’t home

Who is it looking for us?

Who is it searching for us?

Is it something to fear or trust?

We’re scared

Is it something to be afraid or what?

We’re frightened

Fish agreed and entered the water to bring mud for the creation of the earth. They dig the earth moved the mud and made heap with their fins. They started carrying the mud on their shoulders and head to the surface of the water. They came halfway but the soil they were bringing washed away. They tried again and again but failed. Disappointed and embarrassed they returned empty-handed. Singbonga- First Mother ran their hand on them with love. Then the Singbonga- First Mother approached the soil crab and rock crab, who listening to the plan were frightened. They  (soil crab and field crab) took a long breath and entered deep waters. They reached where there was soil. One dug, while the other gathered the soil. In the meanwhile, they made the ocean there muddy. They carried the soil on their shoulders, backs and heads. However, as they reached, the soil washed away.

Singbonga- First Mother told soil crab and field crab,

Don’t be ashamed

Don’t be embarrassed

You agreed to working

That is important

 Now they approached Water Turtle and Field Turtle, who stayed close by. They too went down to water underneath and carried soil on their back. But the soil got washed away as they came up. Turtles too returned empty-handed. Finally, they approached the water earthworm and field earthworm, the two neighbours staying close by.

Earthworms said,

Go we will

Depart we will

We’ll obey what you say

We’ll obey what you speak

But alone?

It is a big job

But just us?

Path is long-long

Narrator

Singbonga and First Mother

How would help come?

This time they send

All of them together

Fishes and Crabs

Along with the Turtles and Earthworms

A work impossible for one

Becomes possible when taken together

 

Hardening mind and body

Shelling up hands and feet

They all went down

Deeper than deep

They gather soil

They make heaps of earth

Diving, Burrowing

Reaching further inside

 

When the soil was piled up

When the mud was gathered

The Earthworm extended himself

From bottom to topographical

Consuming beneath the water

Defecating on the water surface

The Earthworm among them

Was so strong

 

But even then

When the soil comes up

It washes away, does not stay firm

On top of the ocean

Seeing this happen

Turtle dove up

He holds the soil

On his rock-like back

 

Thus is made

The Earth from the soil in the ocean

To bear that burden

The Turtle agrees

Singbonga and First Mother

Their primal desire

Before their eyes

Is fulfilled

Discussion

In the Kurukh creation story, along with the Dharmes, old mother, maidservant, kilkila, and  Landu Gando are involved in the creation of the earth. There are debates and discussion among them as to how to create the earth. The old mother suggests Dharmes create golden kilkila. Further, she advises Dharmes to give life and blood to Kilkila and send it to Landu Gando to get the seed for the creation of the earth. This shows communication, consultation and discussion are an integral part of the Adivasi world view. Similarly, in the case of the Munda creation story, Singbonga- First Mother are in the process of investigation to find out who would bring soil for the creation of the earth. They are ready to talk, convince, counsel and inquire regarding their project. When the Singbonga and First Mother asked, whether they (fish, crab, turtle, and earthworm) are at home? Their first response is, “We surely are home. We surely aren’t home”. This dual response shows that they have agency of their own, and would interact with those with whom they want to. For those with whom they wish to communicate, they are at home, and unavailable for those with whom they did not like to interact. Those who joined the project were not sure whether it would be successful. However, they extended their support and help. Creating earth was a complicated process, for it involved going deep into the water, digging mud, carrying up and finally settle it on something stable.  All of them, fish, crab and turtle when they worked independently, they failed to achieve their goal. Though Singbonga and First Mother were getting anxious but did not get angry on those who were unable to do the work. They extended their love and care to them on their unsuccessful return. But when they worked together, they managed to bring soil from below the water to form the earth. There is no one from the outside to oversee the creation work, but rather all participate actively through discussion, dialogue and communication. There is an emphasis on the the lived experiences, like in the case of ‘kilkila’ who experiences pain. The creation story shows that the distinction between the subject and object is blurred, and everything (Human-Nature-Spirit) are interconnected. The nature of the world cannot be accessed through the binary of universal and particular but understood through multiple-contextualized universals. Different communities have a different creation story, and the same community has different versions of the same story. Each story is located in a particular context which is universal in itself.

The Kurukh and Munda creation stories are reflections of the communities’ conception about the nature of the world. While exploring the creation stories, it was established that the social-cultural- and religious identity is expressed as the unity of human -nature- spiritual interactions among the Adivasis.  It shows that humans, nature and spirits collaborate in the creation of the earth, not by the divine will of God as proposed by the semantic religions. The creation of the world involves lots of trial and errors and efforts of many, and those who have not succeeded are also to be recognised. According to the Adivasi world view, forest are not only trees and plants but also dwelling place of the spirits. At that time forest become synonymous to spirits and vice versa. These identities are fluid and dynamic; and continuously changing, which Bergson calls as ‘continuity of flowing, a becoming’ (Bergson 1907: 364). This shifting nature in the conceptualisation of the world breaks the dichotomy and separation, without treating  anyone superior or inferior. This breaking of the separation is reflected at the ceremonial sowing among the Kurukhs. On the third day of Baisakh Amawas when they do the ceremonial sowing (Muth Bicharna) the head of the family prays to God but addressing the earth for a hundredfold of harvest:[13] (Lakra 2006: 32-32).

 Erke Dharati Ayo, Inna En Ninghay Kool nu Jima Chi Chichkan, Akku Nighay Akhtiya Ra’ai! Nin Emage Dobar, tibar paida chi’ke! Em on muth chichkam, Nighay hajar muth chi’na hi sawang ra’i.

(Behold mother earth, today we deposited (paddy) in your womb. Now it is your power. Give us two fold, three fold harvest. We gave you one handful. You have the power to give us thousandfold)

This position breaks the classification of the world into human, nature and spirit. In doing so it breaks classificatory evolutionary framework, which is rooted in separation. It is a positivist approach where a whole is broken down into its smallest element, and similarities are clubbed together. This compartmental understanding of the world do not give a complete picture of Adivasi society. While the Humans dominated and exploited the natural world, the dimension of the spirits was designated as mysterious and dreadful ‘animism’ and ‘spirit worship’.

Conclusion

According to the Adivasis, the world is made up of the mutual relationship and interaction between Humans-Nature- Spirit, diversity of knowledge and culture, communitarianism and multiplicity. Adivasi Perspective premised on the interaction of the Human, Nature and Spirits, breaks the separation and boundary between them. Thereby it emerges as the fiercest critique of the western and colonial process of knowledge production. In doing so, it brings into account the dimension of ‘spirit’ which had been relegated as superstition and primitive. It does not see identities as fixed, but constantly in motion and changing. This shows that the Adivasi society is changing according to its needs and requirements. Drawing from the creation stories shared by the Kurukhs and Mundas, its calls for the construction of alternative theories from within. It is from the community that the theoretical discourse challenging the dominant paradigm can emerge.

Bibliography

• Akena, F. A. (2012). Critical Analysis of the Production of Western Knowledge and Its Implications for Indigenous Knowledge and Decolonization. Journal of Black Studies, 43(6), 599–619.
• Akhup, A. (eds) (2015). Identities and their Struggles in North East. Tribal Intellectual Collective India & Adivaani. Kolkata.
• Århem, K. (1996). The cosmic food web : Human-nature relatedness in the Northwest Amazon. Descola, P. & Pálsson, G. (eds.). Nature and Society: Anthropological perspectives. Routledge. London.
• Bird-David, N. (1999). ‘Animism’ Revisited: Personhood, Environment, and Relational Epistemology. Current Anthropology. Vol 40. February 1999.
• Bodhi, S.R. & Jojo, B. (2019). The Problematics ofTribal Integration: Voices from India’s Alternative Centers. Shared Mirror. Hyderabad.
• Burkhart, B. Y. (2004). What Coyote and Thales can teach us: An outline of American Indian epistemology. Waters, A. (eds). American Indian Thought. 15-26. Blackwell Publishing. Malden. USA.
• Cajete, G. (2004). Philosophy of native science. American Indian Thought, 45-57. Waters, A. (eds). American Indian Thought. Blackwell Publishing. Malden. USA.
• Descola, P. (2013). The Ecology of Others. Prickly Paradigm Press. Chicago.
• Dos Santos, (2014). Epistemologies of the South: Justice Against Epistemicide. Routledge. New York.
• Dos Santos, B. (2012). Public Sphere and Epistemologies of the South. Africa Development. Vol. XXXVII. No. 1, 2012.
• Gurevich, A. (1992) Historical Anthropology of the Middle Ages, J.Howlett (ed.) Oxford: Polity Press.
• Hebbar, R. (2003). Eternal and Ephemeral: The Significance of Myth and Ritual among the Ho. in Sen, P. (eds). Changing Tribal Life: A Socio- Philosophical Perspective. Concept Publishing Company. New Delhi.
• Kovach, M. (2019). Conversational Method in Indigenous First People Child and Family Review. Volume 14. Number 1, 2019
• Lakra, J. (1984). The Genesis of Man: The Uraon Myth. Sevartham: Indian Culture in a Christian Context. Catholic Press. Ranchi.
• Laenui, P. (2000). Process of Decolonisation. In Battiste, M. (eds). Reclaiming Indigenous Voice and Vision. UCB Press. pp. 150-59.
• Lowie, R.H. (1936). Primitive Religion. George Routledge and Son, Ltd. London.
• Dalton ET, Ethnology of Bengal, 1872.
• Meyer, M.A. (2001). Our Own Liberation: Reflections on Hawaiian Epistemology. The Contemporary Pacific. Vol. 13. No. 1 (SPRING 2001). pp. 124-148.
• Munda, R. & Manki, R. Sosobonga: The Ritual of Reciting the Creation Story and the Asur Story Prevalent among the Munda. Adivaani. Kolkata.
• Palsson, G. (1996) Human-environmental relations: orientalism, paternalism and communalism. in.  Descola, P. & Palsson, G. (eds) Nature and Society: Anthropological perspectives. Routledge. London.
• Rosner, V. (1982). The Flying Horse of Dharmes. The Catholic Press. Ranchi.
• Roy, S.C. (2012). Oraon religion and Customs. Gyan Publishing House. New Delhi.
• Smith, L.T. (2008). Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. Zed Books Ltd. London.
• Tapper, R.L. (1988) ‘Animality, Humanity, Morality and Society’, in T. Ingold (ed.) What is an Animal?, London: Unwin Hyman.
• Vidyarthi, L.P. (1963). The Maler: A Study in Nature-Man- Spirit Complex of A Hill Tribe in Bihar. Bookland Private Ltd. Calcutta.
• Viveiros de Castro, E. (1998). Cosmological Deixis and Amerindian Perspectivism. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute. Vol. 4, No. 3 (Sep., 1998).
• Viveiros de Castro, E. (1998). Cosmological Perspectivism in Amazonia and Elsewhere. Four lectures given in the Department of Social Anthropology. Cambridge University. HAU Master Class Series. Volume 1. February–March 1998.
• Wagner, R. (1981). The Invention of Culture. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
• Wilson, S. (2001). What is Indigenous Research Methodology?. Canadian Journal of Native Education. 25,  ProQuest Central.
• Xaxa, V. (2014). Tribal Culture and Ecology: The Changing Dimensions. In Xaxa, V. (eds). State, Society, and Tribes: Issues in Post-Colonial India. Pearson. Noida.

 

 

[1]              The South is here rather a metaphor of the human suffering caused by capitalism and colonialism at the global level, and a metaphor as well of the resistance to overcome or minimise such suffering.

[2]              CNML, 2^nd year, july 1931, No. 7, pp. 149.

[3]       The story was collected my John Lakra in a village in Surguja district, Madhya Pradesh (Lakra 1984: 33).

[4]      Lit. Seven strip of land.

[5]      Lit. Island of Jammu. For the practical purposes Sat-pati-raji and the Jammudeep see to be the same thing.

[6]       Can be considered as First Mother.

[7]       Kilkila is a kind of king-fisher, a small bird with blue and green wings.

[8]       Very often in Uraon (Kurukh) expression gold and silver go together just for emphasis, without meaning two separate things.

[9]      It can also mean skills and knowledge.

[10]     A town of fine, powdered mud, i.e. a place where earth is available.

[11]    Landu, from the Uraon word lenda for earthworm. Gandu is used here as a pair- word, meaning a person with slow movement.

[12]                Munda R., Manki R., Sosobonga: The Ritual of Reciting the Creation Story and the Asur Story Prevalent among the Munda, Adivaani, Kolkata, 2015, pp. 27-51.

[13]                Lakra, J. (2006). Tribal Spirituality: A Way of Life. Catholic Press. Ranchi.

 

Dr. Joy Prafful Lakra is Ph.D. TISS, Mumbai and an Independent Researcher. He can be contacted in joyprafful@gmail.com

Have you like this article?