NISHADAS ;THE MARGINALISED TRIBE OF THE MAHABHARATA

(Sub theme- Discrimination in religious literature)

Key words- Epic, Attitude, Periphery, Marginalised, Subdued, Contempt, Brahminical, Varna, Khstriya, Conspiracy.

Abstract-Epics give insight in the attitudes and ethos of the society. Popular epic like the Mahabharata gives us glimpses that how the marginalised tribes were treated by the dominating Aryan people. In the narration of the Mahabharata, we come across many groups who were living on/outside the periphery of the so called Aryan civilization. The groups can be identified as Rakashasas, Nishadas, Nagas and Kiratas. These groups were either marginalised and were driven away or got assimilated in the wave of Aryanization. The proposed paper is an attempt of reconstructing the lives of one of the group called the Nishadas.

Nishadas enters in the Mahabharata quit frequently. We have references of Aryan-Nishada marriages. However the most striking Nishada that captures our attention is Eklavya. He was probably the greatest archer of his time and had potential to excel Arjuna, the Aryan hero. But the dominating Aryans (the Brahmin Dronacharya and Kshatriya Arjuna) conspired and neutralised the challenge by asking Eklavya to donate the thumb of his right hand. The episode is indicative of the fact that how the dominating group uses everything including the sacred Guru-Sikshya relation to keep the ‘other’ people subdued. Eklayva’s capacity as a warrior was reduced due to giving away of thumb and later the Mahabharta does not say much about him, except that during the great Mahabharata war, Krishna revels that he had killed Eklavya to avoid any possibility of him joining the hands with Kaurava. The contempt that is obvious in the behaviour of the major Aryan characters towards Eklavya is indicative that the life and emotions of those who are considered as ‘others’ is considered as less important.

Similar attitude of contempt is also obvious in the treatment given to a Nishada woman and her five sons, who were burned to death in Lakshagraha in place of the Pandavas and their mother Kunti. She and her sons were dismissed as unworthy of any sympathy by the authors/ interpolators of the Mahabharata.

1

Popular literature is like a mirror of the society. It gives insight into the social values, practices and prejudices. The Mahabharata, which was referred to as ‘Itihasa’, i.e. the history, was composed and interpolated with many passages from 800 B.C. to A.D.2001. Though the historicity of the events in the Mahabharata is questionable, but as a popular literature it is an encyclopaedia of the society; its inspirations and conflicts. One of the interesting areas of study for the social scientists interested in the history of Ancient India is to study Aryan and Non-Aryan interaction. In the Mahabharata we come across many references to the people, who could be termed as Non-Aryans in the racial and cultural-linguistic sense2. This paper is an attempt of deciphering the lives of the Nishadas, one of the Non-Aryan groups in the Mahabharata.

Life of a Brahmin, superior to Nishada - It is difficult to reach conclusion about the life and culture of the Nishadas, but they are referred as fishermen(Adi Parva, Section XXVIII).

Vinita, the mother of mythical bird Garuda tells her son that if he feels hungry he may eat thousands of the Nishada, but should not take the life of a Brahmin. The castiest Brahminical attitude is obvious in the utterance of Vanita. She says,

“Of all the creature a Brahmana, must not be slain. He is indeed like fire. A Brahmana, when angry, becomes like fire or the sun...... A Brahmana,......is the master of all creatures”( Adi Parva, Section XXVIII)

In the narration that followed, the Garuda ate the Nishadas in large numbers, however by mistake a Brahamana entered in his mouth and that Brahamana started burning the throat of the Garuda like a piece of flaming charcoal. The Garuda asks the Brahamana to come out of his mouth and says,

“A Brahamana must never be slain by me, although he may be always engaged in sinful practices” (Adi Parva, Section XXIX)

According to the Garuda, the life of a Brahmin, even if he is engaged in a sinful practices is not to be taken. The Brahmana replies, “Let this women of the Nishada caste, who is my wife also come out with me” (Adi Parva, Section XXIX)

Finally the Brahamana along with his Nishada wife escapes from the mouth of the Garuda. Apart from the Braminical influence of rating the life of a Brahmin superior, the episode also gives information that the Brahmana had a Nishada wife. Does that mean that the marriages between a Brahmana man Nishada women were taking place?

Matrimonial alliances between Brahmin and Nishadas -The rules and regulations that governs man-women relationship can never be very rigidly applied. Human relations are too complex and complicated to subscribe to rigid regimintalization. It is more so when it comes to relationship involving sex. We come across many examples of man and women throwing socially accepted norms to the wind and staying together.

2

In the above episode, the Brahmana is described as staying with the Nishadas. It also gives an hint that probably the Brahmana and his Nishada wife was looked down upon for this kind of alliance across the Varna3. And to avoid humiliation the Brahmin chose to stay with the Nishadas.

It is also probable that in the beginning when the Aryans came to India and started settling down, the alliances with the Non-Aryan women was not considered as very bad. It is likely that the matrimonial alliances between the Aryan male and Non-Aryan female took place when the Mahabharata was in its initial stage of development. One can understand that when the conquering Aryans came to India, they took many non-Aryan women as their wives. This usually happens in the initial stage of conquest when a migrating conquering race comes and settles down in a new land.

Brahmin, marrying a Nishada girl and staying with the Nishadas, throws many questions. Does this mean that the Brahimns who married a Nishada girl were expelled from the Brahmin community? If not expelled, probably they were heavily censored and felt more comfortable with the Nishadas where they might have been respected for their learning. The tribal society is not burdened with the baggage of caste hierarchy and find it easier to accept new members among them.

In Tripura, a small state in the North East of India, there is a tribal community called Darlongs. It is small community with total population less than 10,000 and spread over few villages in North Tripura. During my Visit to three villages i.e. Darchwai, Betcherra and Kanchan in North Tripura, I found out that some Bengali boys4 who married Darlong girls came and settle down in Darlong village and also embraced Christianity, the religion that the Darlongs follow now . Even I come across a Malyali gentleman who married a Darlong girl. He was comfortable in Darlong village and was speaking Darlong language. Tribal without the baggage of caste system finds it easier to accept outsiders. Similar might had been the cases with some of the earlier alliances between the Aryan men and Non-Aryan women. These Brahmins who married a Non-Aryan women and stayed with the Non-Aryan people must have also proved as a vehicle to carry Brahminical religion and gained converts in the new areas.

Eklavya, the marginalized hero-The episode of Eklavya also indicates the attitude of contempt that the high caste Brahmin and Kshatriyas had for the Nishadas. The coming of Eklavya to Drona with the hope of learning archery and his rejection by Drona is dismissed without any regret by the authors/interpolators of the Mahabharata.

“Kings and princes, desirous of learning the science of arms, flocked to Drona in thousands. Among those that came there, O monarch, was a prince named Ekalavya, who was the son of Hiranyadhanus, king of Nishadas (the lowest of mixed order), Drona however cognisant of all rules of morality, accepted not a prince as his pupil in archery, seeing that he was a Nishada who might (in time) excel all his high born pupils”(Adi Parva, Section CXXXIV)

3

So according to the rule of morality accepted by the authors/interpolators of the Mahabharata, if a Nishada boy becomes a better archer than the high born pupil, it goes against the rule of morality. So to avoid any such possibility Drona had refused to accept Eklavya as his pupil.

The society/authors/interpolators of the Mahabharata expect the Nishada to behave respectfully even if he is rejected by Drona. The poet writes,

“....the Nishada prince touching Drona’s feet with bent head, wended his way into the forest” (Adi Parva, Section CXXXIV)

The Mahabharata describes that Ekalavya made a clay-image of Drona and began to worship it respectfully and practicing weapon in front of the image. In the course of time he became a great archer. It is obvious from the narration that he was a self taught archer, but again the author/interpolator of the Mahabharata says that it was due to his reverence to Drona that he became a great archer.

As the story moves further, the Kuru and the Pandava princess goes to forest on hunting expedition. The dog who was accompanying them was barking and his mouth was shut by the arrows shot by Eklavya. Highly impressed by the skill, the princess asked him about his identity, Eklavya disclosed his identity and also said that he is a disciple of Drona. This had created jealousy in the mind of Arjuna and going back he asked Drona,

“Thou hadst lovingly told me,............,that no pupil of thine should be equal to me. Why then is there a pupil of thine, the mighty son of the Nishada king, superior to me?” (Adi Parva, Section CXXXIV)

Drona thought about the next course of action and went to Eklavya with Arjuna. In spite of the rejection by Drona, the Nishada prince showed reverence to him as the poet describes,

“.....when Eklavya saw Drona approaching towards him, he went a few steps forward, and touched his feet and prostrated himself on the ground. And the son of the Nishada king worshipping Drona, duly represented himself as his pupil, and clasping his hands in reverence stood before him, awaiting his commands” (Adi Parva, Section CXXXIV)

This kind of description reinforced the belief that whatever the teacher/Brahmin does, he should be revered. Percolation of this kind of thinking had killed the critical thinking and spirit of questioning and made people excessively submissive to those who wielded authority or were knowledgeable. This kind of excessive humility kills spirit of resistance. No wonder that India fell pray to foreign invasion frequently and in quick succession. This kind of ideas of giving excessive reverence to the Brahmins, even if he does not deserve it and adherence to outdated and meaningless rituals still occupies the large space and time in India. This kind of cultural inertia acts as a hindrance to the growth and development of the society. From the rational point

4

of view, the excessive reverence that Eklavya had shown to Drona was totally illogical. Treating somebody as an inferior and superior on account of birth limits the growth.

Dronacharya plays ruthlessly with the emotion of Eklavya. He says,

“If O hero, though are really my pupil, give me then my fees” (Adi Parva, Section CXXXIV)

The innocent Eklavya falls in the trap. He feels honoured that the great Brahmin teacher, revered by the Kauravas and the Pandavas is asking something from him, he says,

“O illustrious preceptor, what shall I give? Command me; for there is nothing, O foremost of all persons conversant with the Vedas, that I may not give unto my preceptor.” (Adi Parva, Section CXXXIV)

But how shameless the Droncharya was, though apparently wearing the mask of civility but with very cruel intention says,

“O Eklavya, if thou art really intent on making me a gift, I should like then to have the thumb of thy right hand” (Adi Parva, Section CXXXIV)

In response to this cruel demand the behaviour of Eklavya was very submissive. The poet describes,

“.....Ekalavya, ever devoted to truth and desirous also keeping his promise, with cheerful face and unafflicted heart cut off without ado his thumb, and gave it unto Drona” (Adi Parva, Section CXXXIV)

So this is how a Nishada is expected to behave towards his Brahmin teacher! Even though the teacher may refuse to train him and demand his thumb.

As Ekalavya lost his efficiency as a archer, Arjuna became happy. The poet describes,

“......he had lost his former lightness of hand. And at this Arjuna became happy, the fever(of jealousy) having left him” (Adi Parva, Section CXXXIV)

The Mahabharata tries to capture the eternal drama of human life very effectively. One generally feels jealousy towards someone who is superior to us. Once the efficiency of Eklavya was reduced, there was no reason for Arjuna to feel jealous.

Eklavya do not play any major role in the narration of the Mahabharta, but he keeps coming in. At the time of the ‘Rajsuya yagya’ of Yudhishthira, Shishupala asks how Krishna can be given respect of first worship, when so many other respectable people are available in the assembly, among the names of the respectable people he takes the name of Eklavya. He even rates Eklavya as greater than Krishna,

5

“.........Rukmi and Eklavya and Salya......are here, how O son of Pandu, hast thou offered the first worship unto Krishna?” (Sabha Parva, Section XXXVI)

So probably the Nishadas were the tribe who lived on the periphery of the Kuru-Pandava kingdom and they were allowed to mix with the Aryan people. Presence of Eklavya at the ‘Rajsuya yagya’ indicates this.

Later on at the time of the Great Mahabharata war, Krishna reveals that he had killed Eklavya to avoid any possibility of him joining hands with Duryodhana. Had he(Eklavya) joined hands with Duryodhana along with Jarasandha and Shishupal they would have became invincible. Karna, Jarasandha, Shishupal and Eklavya together were capable of conquering the whole earth. Krishna pays compliment to the bravery and skill of Eklavya. He says,

“Nishada’s son ......of prowess incapable of being baffled, was, by an act of guile, deprived of his thumb by Drona..........Undeprived of thumb, Eklavya, O Partha was incapable of being vanquished in battle by the Gods, the Danavas, the Rakashasas, and the Uragas (together).......for thy good he was slain by me in the field of battle” (Drona Parva, Section CLXXXI)

From the above description it is clear that Drona, Arjuna as well as Krishna had joined in conspiracy against Eklavya.

Later, during the Ashwmedha sacrifice carried out by Yudhishthira after the great war, son of Eklavya was defeated by Arjuna. The describtion is indicative that the Nishadas were fine warrior. The battle between Arjuna and the son of Eklavya is described as,

“The encounter that took place between the Kuru hero and the Nishadas was so furious as to make the hair stand on end” (Aswamedha Parva, Section LXXXIII)

The sacrificial lamb-The Kaurava prince Duryodhana hatched conspiracy against the Pandavas and tried to burn them to death, but instead a Nishada women along with her five sons were burnt to death. The treatment given to the Nishada women and her five sons by the author of the Mahabharata is again indicative of the contempt with which the life of the Nishada people were treated. The poet describes,

“Desirous of obtaining food, there came, as though impelled by fate, to that feast, in course of her wandering, a Nishada woman, the mother of five children accompanied by all her sons. O king, she, and her children, intoxicated with the wine they drank, became incapable. Deprived of consciousness and more dead than alive, she with all her sons lay down in that mansion to sleep.” (Adi Parva, Section CL)

After this Bhima set the lac house on fire and all the Pandavas escaped from the lac house. Though it is not clearly mentioned, the description points out that probably Bhima was aware that some people were sleeping in the house, but escaping from the house and saving their own lives was more important and who cares for the lives the insignificant Nishada woman and her

6

children! The Pandavas hard pressed to save their own lives, did not feel any necessity to think about the lives of the Nishadas. This is a general behaviour of the people who feel marginalised and deprived. The oppressed people are more likely to become oppressor.

The authors of the Mahabharta do not anyway indicates that the Bhima/the Pandavas were anyway responsible for the death of the Nishada women and her five sons, but she came to the Lakshsagriha as if impelled by fate. So if she is burned to death, it was due to her fate.

Conclusion- As the epic plays a very important role in shaping the attitude and values of the people, it is very important to think critically about the message that the epics wanted to convey. The contempt with which the life and dreams of the Nishadas are trampled upon in the Mahabharata are not the things that we find in the epics only. But in a practical life around us we might come across many Eklavya and the faceless and nameless Nishada women, who were made scapegoat to serve the selfish end of the dominating caste hierarchy.

Life and culture of the so called Aryan people generally dominates the historical research in India. Thankfully the things are changing and subaltern history has come into focus. There are many groups in the Mahabharata who can be called subaltern like Nishada, Kirata, Nagas and Rakashasas. There life and culture is waiting to be deciphered. This paper is not a conclusive reconstruction of the lives of the Nishadas, as it cannot be done by reading the Mahabharata alone, but it is an attempt to set the ball rolling.

Popular characters from the Mahabharata captures the imagination of the masses and became the role model. The talented sports persons and sports coaches in India is given Arjuna award and Dronacharya award. But by naming these awards on the names of those heroes, who were talented no doubt, but had contempt for the life and aspiration of downtrodden, what kind of role models we are creating for the generations? Are we not giving them message that winning only matters, no matter at what cost. Like Arjuna became the greatest archer of his time by conspiring against Eklavya. I think the time has come to rethink about our role models.

Education is spreading among the tribals. The educated among them have began to identify themselves with the marginalized tribes of the epics. Kok-Borok poet Mr. Bijoy Debbarma takes Non-Aryan Eklavaya as a representative of the oppressed tribes. The injustice done to him by the upper caste Aryans i.e. Brahmin Dronacharya and Kshtriya Arjuna finds articulation in his poem. He says,

“Arjuna will never allow you to a chatim5 tree,

Even if you attain self-perfection,

Arjuna shall always invariably cut off your right thumb.

He is backed by many a Dronacharya” (Gupta p. 45)

7

So here we find the symbolisms drawn from the Epics used for the articulation of the present day grievances. Giving vent to the grievances through the medium of literature is one of the better ways of reducing the potentialities of conflict.

The self assertion of the oppressed people also find reflections in his another poem and the characters are again drawn from the Mahabharata. He says,

“Dronacharya owes a mountain of debts to you Ekalabbya,

The days of gurudakshina are over.

Now, its time for you to ask back your thumb.

The breeze that spread the fragrance of your blood, now return as a song.

The grass that felt the touch of your blood, is now reciting your poem.”

( Gupta, p.48 )

-----------------------------------------

Explanatory notes-

1. This period is given by Pande G.C. in his essay ‘Socio-Cultural Milieu of the Mahabharata: An age of change’ in ‘Reflections and Variations on the Mahabharata’ Sahitya Akademi, New Delhi, 2009. However the period of composition and development of the Mahabharata still remains a contentious issue.

2. The term ‘Aryan’ meaning noble, represented a particular racial group who invaded India and are considered as the authors of the Vedic civilization. However in the process they assimilated many pre-Aryan socio-cultural practices and later on the term ‘Aryan’ denotes a linguistic-cultural group, having different racial groups or of mixed blood.

3. ‘Varna’ literally mean colour. However later on it came to mean division and subsequently became synonym with caste.

4. Tripura is having a mixed population of nearly 67% Bengalis and 33% Tribals. The tribals are further divided into further nineteen tribes. The domination of Bengalis is visible in all the aspects of life- political, social, economical and cultural.

5. A long tree.

-------------------------------------

8

References-

1. Ganguli K.M., ‘The Mahabharata’, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, 2008.

2. Dr. Gupta Ashes ‘The Fragrant Joom’, A translation of Kokborok poetry in English’, Akshar Publiucations, Agartala, Tripura, 2006.

--------------------------------------

Submitted by- Dr. Ravi Khangai, Asst. Prof. (History), Ambedkar College, Fatikroy, Unokoti, Tripura.

Email- ravikhangai@gmail.com

M-9402168854, 9862799912.

------------------------------------------------

9