Introduction

Sunitha, a hijra in her forties, had invited me to her home, where she lives with three other hijras, for Makara Sankranti, the harvest festival. We sat together on a large blanket she had spread on the light yellow and orange tile floor in her sparkling-clean living room while her housemates—none of whom was her guru—prepared food in the adjacent kitchen. But despite having a nonresidential guru, Sunitha spoke in glowing terms about the guru–chela relationship. “The guru will give to the next generation,” she said, “and the guru is next only to our parents in status.” For Sunitha, the guru–chela relationship incorporates social reciprocity, generational continuity, and the respect for elders traditionally emphasized in both hijra and cishet family relationships. As a guru, she explained,

Sunitha was not alone in describing the guru–chela relationship in a highly idealized manner, similar to how people in cishet families speak about their family relationships. When speaking of her hijra family, she and other older gurus I talked to drew on idealized discourses most commonly used to describe non-hijra families. Such discourses emphasize positive emotions associated with ideal families while covering up the more practical aspects of being part of a family, such as financial and social interdependence—aspects that chelas and younger GNC people are keen to emphasize.

For Sunitha, the financial obligations between gurus and chelas that younger GNC people see as restrictive serve a crucial role in guru–chela relationships. It is essential for chelas to give part of their daily earnings to their gurus because, she explained, “a chela has to take care of her guru. That is the culture. If not, how can the relationship between guru and chela exist? It will get broken up.”