Ekalavaya - The Reality

When ordinary Dalits read the story of Ekalavaya, they feel sympathy for him for the way he was treated by Drona, the teacher of the Pandvas in the epic Mahabharata.

Adivasis by the nature of their lifestyle have been excellent archers. Numerous references testify to the fact that the Nishad tribe was militarised and that the Nishads were not part of the Aryan society but they had contact with it. In the earlier texts Nishads were not disdained, but were seen as warriors, but not as Aryan warriors. It is in the latest theological texts that the Nishads came to be seen as outside of the pale of the Aryan society, untouchables in fact.

There was no need for Ekalavaya to seek a teacher outside of his own tribe, unless he was going to ask for the new iron metal weapons. Only in this technological sense the Aryans could be seen as superior to the Nishads. But it was unlikely that such secrets would be given away simply just by asking. Drona never taught Ekalavaya anything so the question of teacher's fee should have never arisen. Ekalavaya could have refused this unreasonable and cruel gurudakshina or teacher's fee. Considering that the story was written by the Aryans so what is the myth of Ekalavaya trying to tell us?

When the Indian Adivasi society was being broke up by the use of techniques described in the Arthsastara, the remaining militarised tribes were normally absorbed in the caste society under the kashtriya Glossary Link varnaVarna: A theoretical division of classes according to the Hindu religious texts. These are Brahmins (priests), Kshtriyas (warriors), Vaisyas (Farmer/Merchants) and Sudras (Menials) This term is often confused with caste which is a concrete division of social grouping. In theory a caste will belong to a specific varna but this link will often be disputed by the concerned caste and other castes. . If the tribe was not militarised, but craft type, then the poopuation had to find a niche in the sudra varna. Those who resisted to the end would end up beyond the pale, a category denied in theory, but very much apparent in practice. These were the anantvysan or the fifth category or the untouchables, helots like at first, evolving into semi serfs not owned by society nor by individuals but at the disposal of the top three varnas. Those Nishads who refused to make a deal with the Aryans ended up exactly in this situation. The story of the Nishad's fall from grace is well documented1.

What is described was an ideal scenario from the point of view of the Brahamin theoriticians. What would happen if the tribe had already developed class differentitation prior to its contact with the varna socity? Also not all tribes were at the same stage of development in society, technology or class structure. The story in such cases was a little more complex. How do you incoporate some ex tribal members into the warrior class and the rest into the menials?

It is in this context that we can understand the story of Eklavaya.

There is no sympathy for Ekalavaya in Mahabharata for having to be asked to cut off his thumb, thus disarming himself. But there is a reason why Ekalavaya did this seemingly terrible deed. He did benefit from the seemingly non-existent bargain. Previously he could not be accepted by the dharmic i.e. Brahmnincal society. After having offered his gurudakishna or tution fee to the Brahmin Drona, he could be accepted but as a lower level kshatriya warrior doing the bidding of the the higher varnas, that is keeping the dogs silent but without bloodshed, dogs in this context standing for those less powerful Adivasis who were incorporated in the Brahminical dharmic society.

When the Aryans settled down properly, they not only ordred the society into four varnas but actively sought for the co-operation of the local people. The modus operandi was by either appeasement or by coercion. The policy of appeasement was manifest in many ways. Status elevation was within the social heirarchy was one of them. Many local elites were included in the three upper varnas as pointed out by mnay reputed scholars. Apart from that the controversy on pan?a is a surer indication of it. Of the three main interpretation of pan?a, two imply the inclusion of influential individuals and/or groups from the aboriginal people.

More clearly, the relationship of the Aryas with the nisadas, rathkaras and napitas was an evidence of this. All of this groups of people whose prior existence is assumed, received favours from the Aryas. Obviously, they were useful to the dominant group one way or the other. The nisadas help was solicited by the Aryas, and they actively helped them to fight the Asuras. Some are of the opinion that nisadas was the genreic name of a tribes the Aryans met at this stage, and the nisadas helped them to gain new allies and to penetrate into the hitherto inaccessible areas.

The charater of this interaction was later expressed ritually, and this operated at two levels. From among the collobrtors, the nisadas and rathkaras not only participated in the rituasl of the dvijas organised by the Brahmanas but were also allowed to perform their own rituals independently. … Of the three the nisadas were the closest to the Aryas, because they enjoyed the maximum rights; and by the same token the Magdhans were the fartheset from them2.

Dalit literature however, frequently uses the motif of Ekalavaya as someone who betrayed himself and others. Addressing Ekalavaya, one poet stated “since that day they have not even given you a glance”. This of course is not what actually happened. Here also lies another irony of Ekalavaya’s story. Some of the very people who made use of symbology of Ekalavaya joined the ‘other side’ voluantarily. This ironic contradiction is inherent in the caste/class history of India.

If you had kept your thumb

History would have happened somewhat differently

But… you gave your thumb and history also

became theirs.

Ekalavaya,

since that day they

have not even given you a glance.

Forgive me, Ekalavaya, I won’t be fooled now

by their sweet words.

My thumb

will never be broken3.

References:

1. From Tribe to Untouchable: The case of Nisadas by Vivekanand Jha in Indian Society: Historical Probings, People's Publishing House, New Delhi, 1974.

2. Beyond the Four Varnas – The Untouchables of India by Prabhati Mukherjee, Indian Institute of Advanced Study 188, page 82.

3. By Shashikant Hingonekar, “Ekalavaya” Asmitadarsh, No. 12 (April-May-June 1989), translated by From Gail Omvedt and Bharat Patankar in the Hindus- op cited in The Hindus - An Alternative History by Wendy Doniger, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK - 2010, page 674.