Satish Chander's Panchama Vedam - Ekalavya - Ram Dokka's Critique
PALANA
Thanks Sri Veluri gAru for such a nice poem by Satish. It would have been
much nicer had you posted the rest 3 stanzas. Next time, please don't omit
those.
Dear Chy. Dokka! That was a nice analysis by you about Satish Chander's
Panchama Vedam. I have read your analysis with keen interest in the subject
and a great appreciation towards your analytical abilities. I have to differ
with you on several lines.
1) The author is not confused. Sorry if you understand the poet that way.
The poet and poem have to be separated by the reader in his own mind.
The poet brings out his inner feelings through poetic symbolism, runs
through the abstract spheres of the readers, and finally makes the readers
land on hard core reality. That poetic symbolism Satish had chosen is
the panchama - the fifth--- the thumblessness!
According to the Vedic Tradition, everything other than the 4 is nothing
but absolute trash. You know it and I know it. Even the chaturtha in
Vedam is a reject. But, as there have been 4 vedas created, the 4th
category of Hindu Community (Caste) is ok. Where does the 5th one fit?
That 5th one, the panchama, has his vedam. In fact, the panchama has
his vEdana, the no one cares to hear. That's why Satish called the
panchama's vEdana the panchama vEdam.
2) You mentioned that you are not biased based on major issues while
analyzing Satish's poem.
I can not claim like you did. I am biased. I have a biased attitude.
Without bias, I can not focus. I see one thing - this poem is also aimed
at the inhuman acts towards the panchamas by the upper castes. How can we
ignore that. The basic theme of Ekalvya's original story in Mahabharata
was based on that. Imagine, if Ekalavya were a Kshatriya or a Brahmin.
What would have Drona done to Ekalavya? Could Drona ask for the 5th
finger of Ekalavya? Please tell me!
On the flip side, every big guy in Bharatam knew who Karna was.
Did Drona shoot Karna. No! He was a boy with princely genes in him.
To begin with, all the big guys in Bharatam were biased. The authors of
Bharatam were biased, henceforth.
Therefore, saying that Vyasa and Nannaya were biased in depicting
the character and longevity of Ekalavya in Bharatam, is not unreasonable
for an intelligent reader. When youngsters read this with an open mind,
they will realize it. Chinnu asks me always "Why should Ekalavya cut
his thumb and give it away to Drona? Is it because he was a lower caste
guy?"
Throughout Bharatam, caste was an issue. Karna had a horrible time,
eventhough he was born to Kshatriya mother and Soorya. They used
caste to outcaste Karna as Pandavas should be only five. That is ok for
Pandavas to be 5 and called Panca Pandavas. In your opinion, Satis
Chander's Pancama Vedam, is a misconception.
3) I am not against Vedas but I can not agree with several things
written in them. We can interpret them the way we want. There is one
meaning and only one meaning that a sentence in any language offers -
that is the literal meaning.
Go to purusha sooktam:
brAhmaNOsya muKamAsIt --------- brAhmins
bAhUrAjanyah kRtah --------- kshatriyAs
UrUtadasyayadvaiSyaha -------- vaisyAs
padByAgum SUdrO ajAyata -------- soodrAs
Where do the panchamAs fit in? We all know that all these 4 castes can
enjoy the fruits of the Vedas with certain limitations ascertained to each
caste. Even among the brAhmins, based on the Subsect, the practice and
enjoying the previleges of vedas are limited and restricted. Such a
prejudiced and biased society is ours. How can you expect a writer not
to be biased while speaking about the SOCIAL PREJUDICES and BIASES?
4) Well Chy. Sreenivas Parachuri said that Satish Chander did not imply
genetics and heredity in his poem as a reply to your statement about
author's strong convictions towards heredity.
Ram! I don't agree with you, but I have to buy that concept that you
came up with. This guy's grandapa, Ekalavya told him that pancama means
the guy who doesn't have the 5th finger (Thumb). Probably based on this
statement, you concluded that the author, Satish Chander, was eluting to
heredity and genetics. I cas sure see that role of genetics playing here.
Yes! It is genetic! Yes! It is heredity. It is inductive! There is a
selection pressure. That pressure pushes the panchamas to be devoid of the
5th finger. That has become quite natural. If you keep on doing it for
some generations, it becomes hereditary. What happened with the wisdom
tooth - they kept on removing and now among some most recent generations,
widom teeth even don't show up. Similarly, if you decapitate the thumb of
forefathers of the panchamas, the present day panchamas, genetically lack
the thumb(s) and which becomes a feature of heredity in the filial
pedigree. Lamarck's law of selection pressure and Darwins theory of
Evaolution on the lines of Natural Selection play a major role here.
If you think that Satish Chander was arguing on the basis of genetics
in his poem about the panchamas lacking their thumbs these days, that is
true. Your misconception about Satish's intellect is well taken by me as
a practising Biologist.
5) That is the greatness of a poet like Mr. Satish Chander. He added a great
twist to the poem. He brought a grand appeal to his verse. He painted
the character with layers of compassion. That's what I have seen.
Coming back to heredity that you talked about in Satish's poem, Satish
was a great Sociobiologist. That is what I see in his poetry.
Sociobiology is a subject dealing with the social aspects in terms of
genetics. There you go. What Satish is afraid of the selection pressure
being exerted on the panchamas pushing them to be GENETICALLY DEVOID OF
CERTAIN HUMAN RIGHTS. That is what I am afraid of too. No! Your argument
that Satish was biased is NULL and VOID.
Satish Chander is a great observer of HUMAN LIFE just like Charles
Dickens. May be like Dickens, Satish is a cynical observer of Human
Melodrama.
6) Ram! You mentioned about LOGIC of Satish.
No! The author is not confused in the INTERMIX of RELIGION, EPICS
and SOCIETY.
That is the reader who is confused and perplexed with the plethora
of social gimmicks operating in human life back home. We, the readers,
are confused in a society with contradicting Religious Scriptures,
baseless Religious Rituals, Epics demeaning Human Life and insulting
human values (with a handful of exceptions).
Satish is trying to show the reader how we are confused in the muddle of
Social perversion, religious fanaticism, and literary exploitation of
the society through epics. Note the point. This is a new way chosen
by Mr. Satish Chnader. Any thing new is bitter to the old. The old are
always insecure. The eventual is that, the new is going to replace the
old. The old is not only old but also useless and doesn't serve the
purpose these days. Even ecosystems change over time and species become
extinct over centuries.
We have to evolve! What Arabindo said - Man to Superman via mental
evolution. When will man achieve the mental evolution?
Let us accept the fact that Satish is the voice of those panchamas.
He is brave eonough to condemn the Epics, Society, and Religion. All these
have done enough damage to the Indian Society. We still cling on to the
branches infested with fire ants. Take the best of those 3 and leave the
rest nonsense and hazardous.
7) There are no inconsistencies at all in Satish' poetry.
The society has inconsistencies.
The society has multifaceted rules.
The society has polyvalent laws.
The soceity is ruthless.
That is where we are confused and we end up in CONFLICTS with the
SOCIETY.
As I mentioned above, the Purushasookta says that Brahmins came from the
face and the Soodras came from the Feet of the God. What a degrading
statement! We insult our own fellowmen like this. Still it is chanted
this way. Scholars interpret this the way they want. It is not the
interpretation sir. It is the literary meaning that it carries.
Please discountinue these lines from the Sooktam. I was chanting this
the other day and I couldn't proceed further. Is n't this a conflict?
Satish brought out these Social Conflicts. It is hard to digest his
outcry. It is hard to enjoy the essence in his poem for those who never
witness the hardships of those 5th class citizens in the Hindu Desa.
Those 5th class citizens live a life with full of conflicts and
confusions. They finally die with mental delusions created by the above
classes. This is a unwanted social repression. Does it sound like
confusion? If so, this confusion was caused by the VEDAS, the EPICS,
and the RELIGION my Dear Chy. Ram. Please note this.
8) Old Is Bad - Certainly not.
Satish never said that.
If Old always chant the Purusha Sookta that I gave an example,
and believe in that, sure : nammakAlu mooDhanammakaalanaTamlO
tappEmIlEdu. maLLA OLD IS REALLY BAD.
The OLD that is bad like the Purushasooktam has to be rejected and
reformed. Then only OLD can be accepted. Don't you discard OLD
programs and OLD COMPUTERS eventhough they are still operational?
Satish Chander, in my opinion (in a sane state), did not play with the
sentiments of the society. That is mistaken totally by Chy. Ramabhadra
Dokka. Sorry! Satish Chander knows that society, other than the 5th
class (the panchamas) have no SENTIMENTS. That's why he had written this
poem. If all the 4 classes have sentiments, they would have treated
panchamas nice. If Vyasa had sentiments, he wouldn't have created
Ekalavya as a Panchama and wouldn't have asked Drona to chew his thumb.
If Vyasa was nice, Ekalavya would have been a Brahmin or a King.
More later
regards
pAlana
----------------------------------------------
These are my own opinions but not my employer's
---------------------------------------------