A READING OF II KINGS 5:1-27 WITH A DALIT LENS

Introduction

II Kings chapter 5 introduces 6 characters to us. They are, the Hebrew slave girl, Naaman’s wife, Naaman, King of Aram, King of Israel and Prophet Elisha. Among these 6 characters, except for the slave girl and Naaman’s wife, all the other 4 are portrayed to be powerful and dominant, either religiously, socially or politically. The story, on one hand, is predominantly understood as an account which exposes the conversion of a pagan warrior to Yahwism, and, on the other hand, the story unveils the God of Israel as the Universal God. As it is noted earlier, each dominant character is trying to exercise their power and authority over and against one another i.e., it is a power conflict between political, social and religious representation. The King of Aram, the King of Israel, and Naaman the commander of the army represent the political sphere and Prophet Elisha represents the religious realm. By Elisha bringing an end to the dispute, the story unveils the power of religion to be more vibrant than the power of anything else. In Old Testament times, in Jesus’ times and also in our times, religion plays a vital role to initiate divisions and conflicts, but also to promote peace and unity. What is it, which makes religion so powerful? What is it, which makes religion to be decisive? In my view, the religious laws and rituals are the elements which prove religion to be powerful and decisive. Is religious law more powerful than the civil law? Again, in my view, yes, it is. The civil law of India, declares caste as abolished. But, caste is still prevalent and vibrant in India; this proves the power and audacity of religious laws and rituals to be overriding any other laws.

Israel’s Holiness Code

The religion of Israel is known for its Holiness code. In the book of Leviticus we read about different rituals to be followed and performed to keep one holy. Leviticus chapter 13&14 talks about sara’at, mostly understood as ‘leprosy’, but actually referring to a wide range of irritations, swelling, eruptions, or other surface changes that affect not only humans but also fabrics and houses. The holiness code excommunicates the person affected with leprosy from worship, or in certain circumstances, the person might be ostracized from normal social intercourse with the community. The person with certified leprosy must tear his/her clothes, dishevel their hair, cover their mouth and cry out, “Unclean, Unclean” and warn people not to come close to them or allow people to come in contact with them. To be precise, the person with leprosy is branded as an untouchable or a polluted one. If at all someone comes in contact with them, he/she will also be considered as unclean, untouchable or polluted.

Ritual for Purification

The purification ritual for leprosy requires or involves examination, a period of quarantine, re-examination and final disposition. All these processes are expected to be done by a priest. On each 7^th day the priest will re-examine the condition, and if the condition has not spread at the end of this period, he (the priest) will declare the person to be ‘clean’. The priest functions not as a medical doctor who treats and cures a patient, but as a cultic specialist who identifies impurities and administers rituals that enable the community to separate the unclean from the clean. Therefore, under the holiness code the priest tops the hierarchy, just as the Brahmins top the Indian caste hierarchy. The priest is given authority to announce one as clean and also denounce the other as unclean.

Dalit Reading of the Text

Though the text introduces Naaman with a high profile such as a commander of the army, as a great man in high favor with his master, a mighty warrior and the beloved of God (God gave victory to Aram through him), it gives a sad ending to his profile, terming him as a ‘leper’. To contextualize it, I would say, Ambedkar, though he was an educationalist, sociologist, economist, philosopher and the architect of the Indian constitution, was termed as Dalit, untouchable, and an outcast. By saying so I am not proposing an analogy between Naaman and Ambedkar, rather exposing the barbaric religious ideology that excludes both (Naaman and Ambedkar) from the common social life and human dignity.

Further, in the narrative, Naaman approaches the Prophet Elisha for a healing touch. Unfortunately, as Naaman nears to Elisha, the prophet puts a halt to him at the door post and sends him to be washed in the river of Jordan. This act of Elisha enrages Naaman, because, may be, Naaman would have expected Elisha to come out and welcome him, since he was the commander of the army, or could have expected a simple gesture of humanity to be welcomed as a stranger. Welcoming the strangers, according to the Jewish tradition is a sign of respect to God and unwelcoming or being inhospitable towards the strangers is to be condemned. (The sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was nothing but being inhospitable to strangers).

Why didn't Elisha welcome Naaman? , or why did Elisha stop Naaman at the door step and send him to the river to be washed? Is it because Elisha wanted to exercise his authority over and against Naaman’s power and authority, or is it because Naaman was untouchable, or is it because Elisha did not want to be polluted? This behavior of Elisha encourages suspecting (Sniff of Suspicion) the very character or the role played by Elisha. In the words of Foucault, “Despair and hopelessness are one thing, suspicion is another. And if you are suspicious, it is because, of course, you have a certain hope.” Is Elisha exercising his role as a real religious leader, as God would have expected him to be, or is he exercising his role as a ritual keeper? The suspicion arises due to the predominant understanding about God as God of all, who never excommunicates or dehumanizes anyone in the name of concepts of purity and pollution. Marcus Borg, who recently passed away, observes that, two significant thoughts flow throughout the scripture, and they are, firstly, “Be Holy because God is Holy” and, secondly, “Be Compassionate because God is Compassionate.” The dominant Jews politicized the aspect of God’s holiness and gave more importance to it, as they were the beneficiary of it, and also started legitimizing it in the name of God. Elisha, being entrenched in this tradition, permeates it. Elisha, instead of dismantling the structure that condemned people in the name of ritual and purity- pollution laws, succumbed himself to the structure, and was confined to and convinced in healing the victims of the atrocious law of purity-pollution.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, enraged with the dictatorial rule of Hitler and his concentration camps, conscientizes the church, and calls the church, not simply to “bandage the victims under the wheel, but jam the spoke in the wheel itself.” In saying so, I am not advocating violence, neither would have Bonhoeffer. It is a primordial call to jam the dominant structures that victimize people rather than bandaging the victim. In the narrative, a complete/holistic healing could have been the healing of Naaman as well as the dismantling of the exploitative structure, but what we witness in the narrative is that the demonic structure, which is a cause for all barbarianism, remains strong and continues to victimize people in the name of purity-pollution (Gehazi affected with leprosy). Therefore, it is the dominant structure and the custodians and beneficiaries of the structure who are polluted, not the victims.

Mark Chapter 1:40-45 portrays a narration in which even Jesus was challenged by the leper. And Jesus was not moved with pity to heal him, as it is widely understood. Rather, Jesus was angered with the challenge posed by the leper to touch and heal him, ‘if he (Jesus) can’. If Jesus dares to touch him, he will join the polluted community according to the law of purity pollution, or, if Jesus shuns away from touching him, it will mean that Jesus also succumbed himself to the law of purity and pollution. However, Jesus decides to transcend the boundary laid by the law of purity and pollution, under which he was groomed, and dares to touch the untouchable to become an untouchable (Jesus was not able go into the public places, in other words the structure that perpetuates the criminal law of purity and pollution remains and outcasts). Both, Naaman and the leper were able to transcend the boundaries of life-denying forces on one hand, and on the other hand, they intervened and challenged Elisha and Jesus also to transcend and challenge the structure under which they were groomed. Peniel Rufus asserts this as ‘transcending boundaries from both the ends.’ Jesus succeeds in crossing over the boundaries, whereas, prophet Elisha confines to the laid boundaries.

Conclusion

In the Indian Context, the Dalits are considered to be untouchables and polluted. They are denied entry into the temple, and they are denied social status and social justice. The Hindu Brahmanical religion and its ideologies of caste and purity-pollution are responsible for the dehumanized situation of the Dalits in India. The history narrates that the dominant Hindus warned the Dalits to maintain a distance from the dominant caste as they walk in the public places. The Dalits were also asked to not come in contact with the dominants. It is resisting this that many embraced Christianity, expecting it to be away from caste hierarchy. Unfortunately, caste penetrated into Christianity too. The Indian Christian theology, which emerged in denying the western theology to some extent, fell prey to the overarching obsession with dominant Indian philosophy. It is in this situation; A.P Nirmal introduces “methodological exclusivism” which claims the Dalit pathos as a primary source for doing Dalit theology. Many disagree with A.P Nirmal, but, is it possible for the dominants to deny the caste and dismantle the structure of caste in which they are imbued and advocate for the Dalits and do Dalit theology? If one is able to do so, then he or she qualifies to join Jesus in dismantling the dominant structures ensconced in the self and also in the church, institution, organization and society. But, if he or she wants to retain the structure of caste and enjoy the benefits of it on one hand, and, on the other hand, also strives to advocate for the Dalits, then he or she joins Elisha in enjoying the benefits of the structure that pollutes.

Therefore, who is polluted? Who needs healing? Is it Naaman or Elisha? Those who embrace and endorse the dominant structures which pollute are ‘the polluted’. In the words of Thol Thirumavalavan, “if the temple or the God in temple is polluted by the entry of a Dalit, then is God weaker than a Dalit or is a Dalit more powerful than God.”

Christy Gnanadason

MTh I

Confronting the Empires of our Times (Daniel 1:1- 21)

But Daniel resolved that he will not defile himself….. (v. 8)

Nebuchadnezzar is the new super-power who proposes a new world order. He imagines himself at the centre of that new order, set to impose his purpose by every means necessary. He has the power to decide unilaterally what is to happen; the power to make things happen.

Thrown into this bewildering state of affairs are Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah, young men from Judah, exiles in the Babylonian metropolis. They are put into a three year instructional program in the curriculum of courtly wisdom, language and literature of the Babylonians. Imperialistic strategies planned with necessary foresight and firmness are administrated to ‘Babylonize’ these young men in and out. They are uprooted from their homeland, given residence in proximity to the royal dwelling, their names are changed, new knowledge and skills are been imparted to them, attempts are made to alter even their diet and lifestyle. The royalty wants to ensure that all traces of their Jewish identity, their memories, their faith heritage -whatever it is that may distance them from the Babylonian order or allegiance to the king- is done away with. Changing of name (v. 7) symbolises the dependent status conferred upon these young men – they are now the servants of Nebuchadnezzar and his gods. Being insisted upon to attend the royal banquet (king’s food and wine) speaks of the king’s claim to be the sole provider and is the assertion of foreign dominance.

The story takes a dramatic turn when Daniel and his friends resolve not to defile themselves with the royal rations of food and wine. The text does not exactly reveal the motivation behind such an act. Were the food and the wine ‘bad’ because they were mixed with the categories of foods forbidden in the Torah? Or was the wine and the meat originally offered to the idols? Were the Jewish lads strictly following the set of dietary practices characteristic of observant Judaism at least since the Maccabean period?

It is true that the reader may not conclusively know why Daniel and his friends did what they did in this situation. All we know for certain is that they said “NO” to the manners of the high table. However, the course of the narrative in the Book of Daniel can help us to discern that Daniel’s and his friends’ “NO” was an act of resistance against the total domination of the empire; they were resisting the forces that were persuading them with all their might to assimilate to the culture and the ways of the empire. Trusting in God, they were confronting the empires of their times.

Daniel’s and his friends’ story of resisting the royal dictates had implications that extended beyond time and space. It was told and retold by the Jewish people during the long years of exile in Babylon. Even when they returned from Babylon, they were often under the yoke of foreign rulers some of them as notorious as Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The Book of Daniel has a message to offer to faithful of all times suffering under the yoke of oppression: we are emboldened by Daniel’s example to resist the forces of oppressive empires and are assured of God’s vindication for us. We are called to trust and obey the King of Kings, the Lord of heaven and earth, rather than the rulers of this age.

Now, what are the empires of our times ordering us to fall in line to their dictum? What is the food and wine that the modern emperors are offering us? Novelist and social activist, Arundhati Roy in her essay Confronting Empire throws light on these questions:

When we speak of confronting empire, we need to identify what empire means. Does it mean the US government (and its European satellites), the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and multinational corporations? Or is it something more than that?

In many countries, Empire has sprouted other subsidiary heads, some dangerous by-products – nationalism, religious bigotry, fascism and of course terrorism. All these march arm in arm with the project of corporate globalisation……..all this is empire, this loyal confederation, this obscene accumulation of power, this greatly increased distance between those who make the decisions and those who have to suffer them.

In line with Arundhati Roy, we can say that empire refers to an overall systemic reality, the logic policies and practices associated with socio-religious, economic power-centres contributing towards increasing injustice, distortion of identities, deprivation of the dignity and self-respect of fellow beings, for reasons whatsoever suits the powerful.

Contemporary marketing and advertising strategies are the new weapons of the MNCs -‘empires’- of our times, directed towards changing our life-style and even food habits to suit their never quenching thirst for profit. An ordinary Indian begins his day by “waking up to the rich aroma of Nescafe Sunrise”; he/she is told “happiness begins with Bru coffee”. For breakfast one needs to have Quaker Oats as it “enhances your life with every spoonful.” For your mid-day break Kit-Kat is a must and then for lunch we have McDonalds Happy Meals - you cannot but say “I’m loving it. McDonalds.” By the end of the day you are most likely to fall sick, but don’t be worried, for we have the insurance giant consoling us -life me sath bhi, life ke baadh bhi- you only have to take their policy.

Are we advocating complete prohibition of these consumer products? - It may not be practicable or even sensible. But we need to affirm that the choices we make in our life should be motivated by our faith and trust in God rather than being carried away by the alluring jingles of the MNCs.

Christian witness involves confronting the powers of the empire even in the matters of food we choose and the clothes we wear and the way we live our lives. We need also to know that “empires” may be as big as Nebuchadnezzar or the MNCs, but at times they may also be quite ‘intimate’, ‘personal’ and ‘invisible’ – an addiction, an evil ambition lurking within our hearts… Many Christians who are very much vocal about resisting the MNCs and other visible power structures fail to look into their own selves for ‘invisible’ empires ruining one’s Christian witness. We are called to resist the empires of this age both ‘invisible’ and ‘visible’ and dedicate ourselves to the cause of a ‘Higher Empire’ – the kingdom of God.

Bishop Geevarghese Mor Coorilos has dedicated his book Ethical Issues: Subaltern Perspectives to the memory of Mayilamma, an illiterate native of the tribal community in Plachimada, Palakkad, Kerala. Commemorating her, the bishop pens these words: “This book is dedicated to the inspiring memory of Mayilamma who gave her life on behalf of millions who are determined to fight the empires of our times, come what may…”  The sleepy and less-known hamlet of Plachimada came to the limelight when Mayilamma and other villagers confronted the Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. which had started its plant in their village. The dwindling level of water in the village wells and more manifest the change in colour of the water forced her to launch a satayagraha in front of the plant from April 22, 2002 onwards. The bottling plant was eventually forced to stop its activity in March, 2004.

This simple and uneducated village woman fought against the ‘empire’ and prevailed. Daniel and his friends resisted the empire of their times holding fast to their faith and they were vindicated. Now, how about us? What is our witness when confronting the empires of our times?

Joseph John

MTh I