It is interesting to note some section of society has hatred to core for Brahmins. One such example has been found by a "Muslim" intellectual Ms/Dr Beena sarwar: https://twitter.com/beenasarwar/status/210909426603917312
The article quoted was written by Anand Patwardhan [1] that ends with line "let the Dronas write their editorials; Eklavya will no longer sacrifice his thumb." Here Dronas were referred to senior columnist of a news paper. The article [1] goes on to make some baseless allegations such as "The priests of old tightly controlled information flow and ensured that the masses would remain illiterate and powerless." This misconception need to be addressed.
The article quoted was written by Anand Patwardhan [1] that ends with line "let the Dronas write their editorials; Eklavya will no longer sacrifice his thumb." Here Dronas were referred to senior columnist of a news paper. The article [1] goes on to make some baseless allegations such as "The priests of old tightly controlled information flow and ensured that the masses would remain illiterate and powerless." This misconception need to be addressed.
The story is narrated in [1] on Eklavya - a Shudra was son of a Bhil community leader. In other words, He was prince of confederation of Bhil tribes at Nishadha [2]. Before looking into this story, we need to know another rejected student of Drona. The reject student name is Karna, who played role in Mahabharata war [3].
Karna was introduced to Drona as a son of charioteer. Drona simply rejected him on the grounds of his principle that "He is teaching only to Kshatriyas". Drona was unaware of the fact that Karna was born Kshatriya. After rejection by Drona, Karna began his search for a teacher (Brahmin) to teach him archery. He found teacher named Parshuram. Parshuram has made principle that "He will not teach anything to Kshatriyas". Knowing Karna as a son of charioteer, Parshuram accepted him as his student.
Once rejected by Drona, unlike Karna, Eklavya decided to make statue of Drona. He put his full faith in Drona statue, while learning archery by himself. Drona came to know about Eklavya when a dog came to him with mouth filled with arrows. The arrows were shot by Eklavya in such a way that dog was just made silent without killing him. Drona investigated and found that Eklevya was practicing lessons by himself. Drona asked Eklavya who is his teacher as former had refused to teach latter. Eklavya politely replied, his teacher is no other than Drona, pointing his finger to statue of latter.
Two victims of Drona's principle used different approach to obtain knowledge. One obtained from another Brahmin teacher while another obtained through extreme respect for a Brahmin in form of a "Guru" - a teacher. Eklavya never accepted any one as his teacher except Drona. Thus, former made a statue of latter.
The thumb impression is very important symbol for illiterates in modern world. Therefore, the message hidden in Drona-Eklavya story [2] will often remain hidden. The demand for thumb by Drona was an extreme test of Eklavya. It was a test of "Shisya Dharma". Eklavya successfully passed the test. Learned Eklavya presented a Nobel example of "Guru Bhakti" and got rid of very symbol of modern illiterates.
In modern India, all three legends are remembered with very high esteem. Drona was an exceptional teacher and, Arjun and Eklavya were his exceptional students. Awards are named after these exceptional personality in Indian history (Not Mythology, Marxist historians feel free to disagree though) for exceptional contribution in sports education.
One can always argue that there was hidden agenda of Drona for Thumb-chopping test. This agenda was to make Arjun invincible warrior in archery. His favoritism for Arjun was well known. Drona saw a formidable challenge for Arjun in the form of Eklavya. However, one can see in later stage of Mahabharat that favoritism of Drona led to his death by his most favorite student Arjun. On many other occasions, Mahabharat depicts down side of favoritism. This favoritism exist among many diverse relationships e.g. father and son (Dhritrashtra and Duryodhan), husband and wife (Arjun and Draupadi), Nobelist vs treacherous (Yudhisthir vs Shakuni).
This discussion suggest that Shudra were free to choose their own way of life. There is no reason, otherwise, to make Eklavya a prince of Shudra community "leader". Furthermore, Brahmins in this period did not controlled flow of the knowledge. There are few important questions need to be answered. who determined caste as upper and lower caste? If caste in a society can be attributed to a work group, how one work group is superior to another? who decides it? Certainly not God or a Brahmin.
Note: Wikipedia references are used to provide general information on important Mahabharat characters. Most accurate description can be found in original text of Mahabharat.
References
[1] Patwardhan, A., (1992) "Intellectual Brahminism", http://www.patwardhan.com/writings/Intellectual%20Brahminism.htm
[2] Anonymous, (2012) "Ekalavya", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekalavya
[3] Anonymous, (2012) "Karna", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karna
No comments:
Post a Comment