RAVAN Hero of Mulnivasi Bahujan

"Patana" by Latari Kawadu Madavi's

Translated into English from Marathi BY Dr. K. Jamanadas On the Occasion ofDr. Ambedkar Jayanti - 14th April 2000Book Available for Free Download at :

http://www.ambedkar.org/patana/

Translator's Submission:

When I was asked to preside over the function to launch this inflammatorybook in Chandrapur, which had already caused flutter in Nagpur, I was too happy to accept the invitation.As I went on reading the book, more and more I got the feeling that this is "the" thing, which no otherAdivasi author had talked about. When I was asked to translate it in English, I very gladly consented and theresult is before the masses to judge.It is said about translations, that more you try to make it beautiful less of fidelity is achieved. They can eitherbe literal or literary. I have tried to be more faithful sacrificing the beauty. "Patana" means flame, fire, flare,blaze, glare, glow in Adivasi Koytur language. The book is full of it. The masses, rather than the "classes",have to judge whether I could do justice to the original author, as the book is addressed to the masses.Being a collection of articles written by him at different times, it has some repetition for which original authorhas expressed regrets. Two chapters are not included in English "Patana", instead two new chapters areadded. With this exception, this "Patana" is as near the original as possible. All the views expressed are hisown, I have reproduced them though I personally have different opinions on some points. I hope I havebeen able to bring to life the temperature and temperament of the original.Adivasi is one the three groups, the post Buddhistic Hindu society has produced, as was brought out by Dr.Ambedkar, the other two being criminal tribes and untouchables, and the author belongs to the group andwrites for them."Patana" stresses: Adivasis are not Vanavasis, a derogatory term coined by RSS to enslave Adivasis."Patana" demands the rights of Self Determination. It searches for its own identity and concludes that theonly "Indigenous People" is the recognition, they are striving for and all other terms are discarded."Patana" denies the Laws of Hindus based on Manusmriti and preaching inequality and craves forimplementation of their own egalitarian Laws."Patana" resents the slavery imposed upon them by the Hindu religion and revolts against it."Patana" describes how the Adivasis are killed by Adivasi police in the name of "Naxalite movement""Patana" denounces the Hindu gods and eulogizes the Adivasi king Ravana as their ideal, the King whomthe Hindus all over India, more so in North than in South, burn publicly with much fanfare in a grandceremony in the name of Ramlila.Lastly, "Patana" establishes its connection with Ambedkarism and finds solace for his people in theteachings of the Buddha.A peep into the history of Adivasis may be useful to understand "Patana".

Adivasis are post Buddhistic

Some scholars believe that present day Adivasis are the survivals of the Neolithic Age, being driven intohills and forests by later Aryan invaders and they are at present represented by the Gonds, Bhils, Santhals,etc. and a number of superstitious along with the worship of manes and spirits and Phallus images of stoneand wood and the use of amulets, beads, sacred threads, shells, stones, etc., for curing diseases andkeeping away the evil spirits can be traced to the Neolithic period. [Mahajan, "Ancient India", p. 28 ff.]

But it is far from the truth. Sociologists do not believe that the present S.T.s are that ancient, as mentionedby Nadgonde, who avers that sociologists neither think them to be the most ancient society nor the mostoriginal residents. [Nadgonde, p.2]At the time of rise of Buddhism, the society was so much intermixed that no trace of "pure" Aryans, or pureDravidians for that matter, was left. Rhys Davids has observed:"It is generally admitted that there are now no pure Aryans left in India. Had the actual custom been as strictas the brahmin theory, this would not be so. ... in Northern India the ancient distinction, Aryan, Kolarian, andDravidian, cannot, at the time of the rise of Buddhism, any longer be recognized. Long before the priestlytheory of caste had been brought into any sort of working order, a fusion, sufficient at least to obliteratecompletely the old landmarks, was an accomplished fact ..." [Rhys Davids, "Buddhist India",p. 59]Dr. Ambedkar also has expressed the similar opinion. It follows, therefore, that the creation of S.T.s is apost Buddhistic phenomenon, and the present day Adivasis are descendants of population, who were calledNaagas and were Buddhist by faith, and after the fall of Buddhism were degraded to the present status bythe ruling priestly class because Naagas had the enmity with the Aryans, did not worship Aryan Gods, didnot perform yajynas but were devotees of Arhats, and Chaiytas.Be it, as it may, the main point is whether they identify themselves with Brahmanic traditions and norms orBuddhistic. "Patana" strongly favours the latter.

Indus Valley civilization was not of Aryans

There was a time that the Brahmins as late as Tilak, took pride in projecting themselves as conquers. Butpost-Tilak Brahmanic scholarship, after the exploration of Indus valley sites by 1921 to 1927, coinciding withthe rise of RSS, is bent on proving that Aryans are the original residents of India and that there was no"Aryan Invasion". They try to prove that Aryans were a civilized people and were the builders and not thedestroyers of Harrapan Civilization. What is the reason, that they wish to somehow prove this? To us, itappears that, since Mahatma Jotirao Phule criticized the "Arya Bhats" for the atrocious behaviours of thesepeople towards "shudras and ati-shudras", in this "Land of Bali" - Bali Sthan -, and organized the massesagainst the Aryabhats, the latter felt that they will loose the supremacy, which they had achieved and very jealously guarded. So it became eminent for them, they prove that they are not aliens, they belong to thesoil, and that Aryan Invasion is just a myth. Voluminous literature is being created by them and everymethod is being used to promote through the media, print as well as electronic, to put forward this view. Notwithstanding all this, it was the Naagas who were the original residents of this land and Aryans were theinvaders. That is the verdict of the history. Aryans proudly mention the cities burned by them in Saptsindhu,they also declare name of Rishi who championed to cross Vindhyas and pave the way for invasions inSouth India in later times, do they mention any name who went to west to invade? Afterall, people alwaysmigrate from barren land to "greener pastures", not vice versa. Why should Indians migrate to deserts andunfertile lands of middle east with inhospitable climate?

India was land of Naagas and its language Tamil

Who were the people inhabiting India during the Indus Valley Civilization? The modern scholars think thatthe Dravidians are the descendants of people from Harrapan Civilization. In their opinion, "...the creators ofthe Indus civilization were the forefathers of the Dravidians, who today mainly inhabit southern India."[Karan Sing and Daisaku Ikeda, "Humanity at the cross roads", p.2]Like many others like Gail Olmvet, Datta Ray Chaudhari and Majumdar also opine that, the main basis ofIndian social cultural system is presumed to be Vedic Culture. This presumption is baseless, andunacceptable. There is no doubt that, the Indus valley culture played a great role in the development andpreservation of Indian culture. [Kosare, p. 263]

Dr. Ambedkar's views

The following points emerge from his writings:

1. Undoubtedly the Naagas were non-Aryans. Vedic literature reveals a spirit of conflict, of a dualism, and arace superiority between two distinct types of culture and thought. The mention of the Naagas in the RigVeda shows that the Naagas were a very ancient people.2. Naagas were in no way uncivilized people. There was a very close association by intermarriage betweenthem with the Royal families of India. Not only did they occupy a high cultural level but they ruled a goodpart of India.3. That Andhradesa and its neighborhood were under the Naagas during early centuries of Christian era issuggested by evidence from more sources that one. The Satvahanas, and their Successors, the Chutu KuluSatkarnis drew their blood more or less from the Naaga stock.4. Contrary to the popular view that Dravidians and Naagas are the names of two different races, the fact isthat the term Dravidians and the Naagas are merely two different names for the same people.5. The word 'Dravida' is the Sanskritised form of the word Tamil. The original word Tamil when imported intoSanskrit became Damila and later on Damila became Dravida. The word Dravida is the name of thelanguage of the people and does not denote the race of the people.6. The thing to remember is that Tamil or Dravida was not merely the language of South India but before theAryans came it was the language of the whole of India, and was spoken from Kashmere to Cape Camorin.In fact it was the language of the Naagas throughout India. ["The Untouchables", pp. 56, 58, 59, 63, 66, 75]

Tribals are Naagas

By study of stupas at Sanchi and Amaravati, Fergusson describes mainly two types of persons worshipingBuddha and being disciples of Buddhism. Turanians are the Dravidians, also termed the Naagas, whom wenow know as aboriginal tribal population. The people, whom Fergusson referred to as "Hindoos", wereBuddhists, as he himself clarifies: "... the sculpture meant to represent the inhabitants of the province nowknown as Upper Bengal, more specially of the districts of Tirhoot and Behar, which were assuredly thecradle of Buddhism. ..." [Fergusson, p. 225]The people who are associated with Buddha in both the stupas of Sanchi and Amarawati, are the mixedrace of Bengal, with some Aryan blood, but mostly which was mixed with the aboriginal tribes of Bengalbefore Aryan invasion. That the Buddhism could rise on its ruins, is the evidence of it.Another important question is, Are the people who wear the snake hoods are as same race or not.Fergusson believes that the difference is only artistic, they are the same people but of two different nations.He explains that these are the aboriginal tribes.:"The people whose manners and customs appear to present the closest affinities with what we found on themonuments, are those known as the Gonds and other closely allied tribes inhabiting the country to thesouth of the Vindhya hills. From their language we learn that they were allied to Dravidians, now occupyingnearly the whole of Madras Presidency, ..." [Fergusson, p. 225]After careful study of figures, Fergusson comes to conclusion that people with snakes are the Naagapeople. [Fergusson, p. 192]

Brahmanic traditions do not depict correct picture

It is now well recognized that Brahmanic books try to depict the superiority of Aryan / Sanskritic / Brahmanicculture and ignore the vast population, which had always been against this culture. Prof. Rhys Davids, aptly,points out this mentality:"It is the accepted belief that it is in the literature of the Brahmins that we find the evidence as to thereligious beliefs of the peoples of India in the sixth and seventh centuries B.C. This seems to me more thandoubtful. The priests have preserved for us, not so much the opinions the people actually held, as the