The true story of Ekalavya.

One of the most overrated warriors/archers/characters in Mahabharata. People even ignorantly claimed him to be a lower class man, even though he is the son of a king, and was a prince, he had the status of a royal upper caste individual. Everything will be according to BORI, as it is the critical edition, closest to Vyasa's edition.

• Background of Ekalavya
• He was a descendant of the asura clan.

Quote:

From the race of asuras known as krodhavasha,63 many famous kings were born on earth. I have mentioned them to you—Nandika, Karnaveshta, Siddhartha, Kitaka, Suvira, Subahu, Mahavira, Bahlika, Krodha, Vichitya, Surasa, the handsome king Nila, Viradhama, Dantavakra, Durjaya, Rukmi, King Janamejaya, a tiger among kings, Ashada, Vayuvega, Bhuriteja, Ekalavya, Sumitra, Vatadhana, Gomukha, the kings known as Karushaka, Kshemadhurti, Shrutayu, Uddhava, Brihatsena, Kshema, Ugratirtha, Kuhara, the king of Kalinga and Matimana, an Indra among men and known as Ishvara.

Analysis: The term "Krodhavasha" means "those who are slaves to anger", so basically Ekalavya was a demon (asura), he was descended from them. So he had unnatural/extraordinary origin. He ws not an ordinary man, perhaps the so called competence and skills that he acquired were not even through his own work then. He must have inherited superhuman skills and strength because of his origin from the demon clan.

Source: Adi Parva Section 61

• Furthermore said about them (elaboration)

Quote:

In ancient times, these kings were born on earth from the race known as krodhavasha and they had great strength and performed great deeds. O ruler of men!

Analysis: Ekalavya's called a "king" and he was born from this race (kroshavasha). Not deprived of anything, he had special privledges, he was no commoner, no outcast, and no member of the lower caste of people.

Source: Adi Parva Section 61

• Ekalavya's heritage (his father).

Quote:

O king! Ekalavya was the son of Hiranyadhanu, the king of the nishadas. He came to Drona.

Analysis: A son of a king.

Source: Adi parva Section 123

• Ekalavya's identity

Quote:

Ekalavya replied, “Know me to be the son of Hiranyadhanu, the king of the nishadas. I am Drona’s student and I am trying to become skilled in Dhanur Veda.”

Analysis: This implies that Ekalavya was not skilled in the art of archery (Dhanur Veda), as he said he is still trying to become skilled. It also further proves that he was royalty and a part of a royal family. Him describing himself as a student of Drona is false though, as he may have considered him his guru but Drona never considered Ekalavya a student.

Source: Adi Parva Section 123

• Why did Drona refuse to teach Ekalavya?
• Here is the description of Drona's refusal

Quote:

However, since he was the son of a nishada,346 Drona, who was learned in dharma, thought about it and refused to accept him as a student of archery, out of consideration for the others.

Analysis: It should be noted clearly that it was not just because Ekalavya was the son of a nishada, but also out of concern for other people, that Drona chose to reject him. Nothing is stated about Hastinapore, Kurus, Magadhas, Jarasandha etc.

Source: Adi Parva Section 123

• Why Ekalavya cut his own thumb off?
• Because he said that he was Drona's pupil.

Quote:

At this, Drona told Ekalavya, “If you are my student, give me my fee.” On hearing this, Ekalavya happily asked, “O illustrious one! What can I give you? Command me. O you who know the brahman! There is nothing that cannot be given to the preceptor.” Drona said, “Give me your right thumb as a fee.” On hearing Drona’s terrible words, Ekalavya kept his promise. Always devoted to the truth, he cheerfully cut off his own right thumb, with happiness on his face and peace in his heart, and gave it to Drona.

Analysis: Ekalavya should be blamed more for this incident, as he was still smiling even though he jsut cut off his own thumb, he chose to do it, the decision was his. So why be angry at Drona?

Source: Adi Parva Section 123

• Who were the Nishadas?
• Several descriptions of them.
• Footnote number 346

Quote:

Hunter or fisherman. Usually, described as dwelling in the mountains and forests.

• A king named "Nala" was also a king of Nishadas, he was greatly respected among people.

Quote:

But there were other kings who came and went before, with more power, great warriors, great souls and blessed with all the good qualities. They were Puru, Kuru, Yadu, Shura, Vishvagashva of great endurance, Anena, Yuvanashva, Kakutstha, the brave Raghu, the invincible Vitihotra, Bhava, Shveta, Brihadguru, Ushinara, Shataratha, Kanka, Duliduha, Druma, Dambhodbhava, Para, Vena, Sagara, Sankriti, Nimi, Ajeya, Parashu, Pundra, Shambhu, the pure Devavridha, Devahavya, Supratima, Supratika, Brihadratha, Mahotsaha, Vinitatma, Nala of the nishadas,81 Satyavrata, Shantabhaya, Sumitra, the lord Subala, Janujangha, Anaranya, Arka, Priyabhritya, Shubhavrata, Balabandu, Niramarda, Ketushringa, Brihadbala, Dhrishtaketu, Brihatketu, Diptaketu, Niramaya, Avikshita, Prabala, Dhurta, Kritabandhu, Dridheshudhi, Mahapurana, Sambhavya, Pratyanga, Parahan and Shruti. These kings and hundreds of others, as many as lotuses, have been heard of. Giving up immense wealth and pleasure, these great, powerful and wise kings attained death, as did your sons.

Analysis: A Nishada king was considered great, powerful & even wise. He was said to be in the same league as Anaranya (the ancestor of Ramayana's lead character "Rama") and Kuru (the ancestor of Arjuna, Bhima, Yudhishthira, Duryodhana etc).
Source: Section One Anukramanika Parva

• Description by the mother of Garuda (someone who was pretending to be a bird/eagle).

Quote:

When he had heard the words of the snakes, Garuda told his mother, “I am going to get the amrita. But I wish to eat something. Tell me what.” Vinata replied, "The nishadas68 have their excellent home in a remote part of the ocean. Eat thousands of nishadas and bring back the amrita. But never set your mind on killing a Brahmana."

Analysis: As per Garuda's mother, the lives of one thousand Nishadas are nothing compared to the life of one Brahmin.

Source: Adi Parva Section 24

• Narrative that describes the Nishada tribe as fishermen, not a footnote but a direct line from the text  that described what was in the footnote.

Quote:

The traveller in the sky killed many nishadas, who depend on diverse fish for a living.

Analysis: Since they depended on "fish" for a living perhaps they had some sort of connection to the fisherwoman "(Satyavati), that became the queen mother of Hastinapore and prior to that she became a queen by marrying Santanu.

Source: Adi Parva Section 24

• An asura was reborn as a Nishada king.

Quote:

The third great asura, immensely powerful and with immense valour, became the king of the nishadas on earth.

Analysis: It is the third son of "Kalaka" that became the ruler of Nishadas. We don't know who this ruler was though. It is not stated, maybe it was Hiranyadhanu?

Source: Adi parva section 61

• Janamejaya (a different Janamejaya, he was an ancestor of Bhisma), had a son who was considered a Nishada.

Quote:

Janamejaya’s sons were famous on earth because they were very strong—Dhritarashtra who was born first, Pandu, Bahlika, the immensely energetic Nishada, the powerful Jambunada, Kundodara, Padati and Vasati as the eighth.

Analysis: It is interesting how we find common names like "Bahlika", "Pandu", "Dhritarashtra" etc in this passage.

Source: Adi Parva Section 89

• After the death of Drona the word "Nishada" is used as an insult.

Quote:

In the battle, he slew my relatives and not those of anyone else. Having only severed his head, my fever24 has not been assuaged. My heart is still suffering, because I did not hurl his head, like Jayadratha’s head, into the land of the nishadas.25

Analysis: The places where a Nishada lived was considered inferior/shameful, so i guess Nishadas would also recieve rebukes (although we rarely see it described in Mahabharata). Still Nishada kings like Nala & the son of Janamejaya were praised, they recieved accolades and recognition.

Source: Drona Parva Section 168

• Ekalavya's feats
• Silencing a dog of the Pandavas servants
• Description of the dog

Quote:

A servant followed the Pandavas, carrying the required objects with him and he had a dog with him. They wandered around in the forest, their hearts set on what they wished to do. The dog also wandered off in the forest, got lost and came upon the nishada. On seeing the dark nishada in the forest, his body covered with dirt and clad in a dark deerskin, the dog began to bark.

Analysis: A dog that was helpless, could not defend itself. And was still alive after the touch of the arrows of Eklavya.

Source: Adi Parva Section 123

• Ekalavya's actions against the dog

Quote:

When it kept on barking, he displayed great dexterity. In one instant, he shot seven arrows into its mouth. The dog dashed back to the Pandavas, its mouth full of arrows.

Analysis: Shooting seven arrows into the mouth of a dog is not quite a great achievement compared to warriors that can shoot one hundred arrows into the body armor of one opponent in a battlefield with several opponents.

Source: Adi Parva Section 123

• The Pandavas reaction on this achievement

Quote:

On seeing this, the brave Pandavas were extremely surprised. At this supreme and dextrous feat of shooting blind,347they praised the person who had done this, but were also ashamed of their own skills.

Analysis: It's quite obvious that at this moment in time (in their lives) such an achievement was far above the capabilities of the Pandavas. But when it comes to later in life then even the Upapandavas were able to achieve such feats of shooting multiple/numerous arrows at once with deadly accuracy.

No some people may claim it was "Sabhda-Veda"(a technique where you shoot by sound, like sonic archery, you clsoe your eyes and shoot your target by following it's sound). But if so Arjuna was able to do that as well against the illusions of the demons and gandharvas he faced many times.

Source: Adi Parva Section 123

• Aftermath of this incident
• The Pandavas got more training and made themselves superior.
• Arjuna became the best in fighting with every weapon.
• Ekalavya was called subjugator of enemies

Quote:

That conqueror of enemies touched Drona’s feet with his head. He went to the forest and used clay to make Drona’s image. He began to worship and treat this as his preceptor, devoting his mind to learning archery in accordance with the proper disciplines.

Analysis: This quote tells us alot. It tells us that Ekalavya wished to learn proper archery and discipline. It also tells us about the possibility of Ekalavya having defeated many people before he ever came to Drona & requested him for training.

Source: Adi Parva Section 123

• 
  
• Ekalavya's defeats
• Bhima's conquest

Quote:

The strong Kounteya used his strength to defeat the land of the Vatsas, the lord of the Bhargas, the lord of the Nishadas and many other owners of the land, led by Manimana.

Analysis: Maniman/Manimana was not the king fo the Nishadas. He was the king of other territories notice the "many other owners of the land" line. Those owners were led by Manimana, he survived after Bhima defeated him, only to be killed by Bhurishravas in the Kurukshetra war. Clealry the lord of Nishadas was also defeated by Bhim, and his entire kingdom was conquered in this paragraph. But the name of this lord/king is not written.

Source: Sabha Parva Section 27

• Sahadeva's campaign

Quote:

"The illustrious one swiftly conquered the country of the nishadas and Goshringa, supreme among mountains."

Analysis: You can't conquer a country without defeating it's king (Ekalavya/Hiranyadhanu).

Source: Sabha parva section 28

• Proof that Ekalavya was subjugated in the Digvijaya Parva

Quote:

Matsya90 fixed the sides,91 Ekalavya held the footwear.

Analysis: He held the footwear that Yudhishthira would wear on his feet, so his palce was at his feet, he accepted Yudhishthira's supremacy, not out of respect but after being defeated in war, and acknowledging his kingship.

Source: Section 274(49)

• Death of Ekalavya

Quote:

He was challenged by Ekalavya, the king of Nishadha, who was thought to be invincible. But Krishna killed him and robbed him of his life, forcefully smashing him against a rock, like Jambha.34

Analysis:

After this (Rajasuya Parva) sometime later before the Kurukshetra war, but after Virata Parva, because Ekalavya was requested for help during the begininng of Udyoga parva. Ekalavya died at the hands of Krishna, he quickly killed Ekalavya. This happened in Udyoga Parva. It's not that Krishna threw a rock at Ekalavya and killed him, it's that Krishna took hold of Ekalavya's body and grabbed him by his head, smashing him across a rock.

Source: Udyoga Parva Section 47

• Praise after death
• Praise 1

Quote:

Jarasandha, the great-souled king of Chedi, the immensely strong Ekalavya from Nishadha—all of these have been killed through my yoga, for your sake.3

Analysis:

Jarasandha was killed by Bhima in a wrestling amtch nto through yoga and not by krishna. Thus this quote of Krishna is false. Not accurate/beleivable.

Source: Drona Parva Section 155

• Praise 2

Quote:

‘“Vasudeva replied, ‘If Jarasandha, the king of Chedi and the immensely strong Nishadha4 had not been killed earlier, they would have become terrible now. There is no doubt that Suyodhana would have chosen those supreme among rathas.5 They have always harboured wicked intentions towards us and would have gone to the side of the Kouravas. All of those great-souled ones were brave, skilled in the use of weapons and firm warriors. They would have protected the army of the son of Dhritarashtra like the immortals. Resorting to the son of a suta, Jarasandha, the king of Chedi and the son of Nishadha, Suyodhana would have been able to conquer the entire earth.

Analysis: The problem with these praises is that Krishna claims alot, but not many of his claims seem to come true. He said that Sisupala, Jarasandha, and Ekalavya were all killed through yoga but that's just simply not true. It's a blatant lie. Jarasandha was slain in a wrestling match by Bhima. Sisupala was slayed by Krishna's weapon (the disc) not any yoga. Ekalavya was killed due to being smashed against a rock, not because of yoga.

Source: Drona Parva Section 156

• Praise 3

Quote:

It is also for your sake that Drona adopted the disguise of a preceptor and severed Nishadha’s thumb.10 With his finger guards, the son of the Nishadha was firm in his valour. He was as resplendent as a second Rama in the forest. O Partha! Had Ekalavya possessed his thumb, the gods and the danavas, with the rakshasas and the serpents, would never have been able to defeat him in a battle. His fist was firm and he could continuously shoot, throughout the day and night. How could a mere human have looked at him? It is for your sake that I killed him in the field of battle.

Analysis: Whether the "Rama" Krishna is talking about is Balarama, Dasharatha's son Rama, or Karna's preceptor Rama, is debatable. Regarding the opinion krishna had of what Drona did, it is baseless because Krishna never spoke to Drona and he did not know what was going on in his mind.

Source: Drona Parva Section 156

Do you still feel sorry for Ekalavya knowing that he was a slave to anger? I don't. He was a prince and a king, he was a cannibal and an asura descendant. He was not a officer of Jarasandha, his father was not an ally of Jarasandha either.

Drona refused to teach Ekalavya because he was a Nishada, not to protect hastinapore, or because Ekalavya was a supporter of jarasandha. Those are just fake "kahanis" like him being a low caste man and incarnation of Dhrishtadyumna.
Only thing that was stated was that had Jarasandha not been dead then he would have fought on Duryodhana's side, and Ekalavya would also join Duryodhana because of his enmity against Krishna/Arjuna.
So one by one they were each killed before the Kurukshetra war, they were never allies when they were alive, them becoming allies was only a future possibility/threat that Krishna was worried about.
Sisupala was Jarasandha's generalissimo, Ekalavya was not.
According to Bori, Ekalavya was only equal to Arjuna (an Arjuna that had not even completed his training) not superior (as Bori removes the line of Kmg's translation).
Quote:

He went to Drona and affectionately told him, “In your affection, you embraced me and told me that no pupil of yours would ever be my equal. How is it that you have another valorous pupil in this world, the son of the nishada king, who is better than everyone else?”

Analysis: Arjuna is only impying that Ekalavya was better than everybody else (everyone except for Arjuna), he left himself out of the equation. The only thing he said about himself is equality. Ekalavya was just considered "immensily strong" that's it. Their's nothing special about him.
Source: Adi Parva Section 123