Between Tradition and Change: Cultural Beliefs and Customary Practices Among Khasi and Jaintia Communities in Meghalaya, India

Abstract Cultural beliefs and customary practices shape how communities interpret uncertainty, maintain social relationships, and negotiate continuity and change. However, beliefs associated with omens, ritual restrictions, illness, death, kinship, and sacred landscapes are often classified collectively as superstition, obscuring their diverse social and cultural meanings. This study examines patterns of acceptance, rejection, and uncertainty concerning selected cultural beliefs and customary practices among respondents from Khasi and Jaintia communities in Meghalaya, Northeast India. Drawing on a descriptive, cross-sectional online survey of 109 voluntary participants, informed by preliminary qualitative inquiry, the study analyses responses to 15 statements concerning animals, everyday objects, funerary practices, kinship, sacred groves, illness, and pregnancy. The study used descriptive statistics to examine response patterns and respondents’ perceptions of how these beliefs influence personal convictions and decision-making. The findings reveal considerable variation across the propositions examined. Agreement was comparatively high for the maternal uncle’s role in a child’s first haircut (52%) and the perceived consequences of violating sacred-grove rules (55%). By contrast, 69% of respondents disagreed with the proposition that crows appearing on roofs or in courtyards indicate misfortune. Uncertainty was also substantial across several items. Under the study’s original classification system, 48.7% of respondents were categorised as influenced or highly influenced by the beliefs examined. In comparison, 61.5% reported that the beliefs primarily affected personal convictions rather than decision-making. These findings suggest examining cultural recognition, individual conviction, and practical influence as distinct analytical dimensions. The study contributes to discussions of Indigenous knowledge and cultural change by demonstrating the importance of attending to internal variation without reducing culturally embedded practices to a binary opposition between rationality and irrationality.