Use of Myth in Dalit Autobiographies

(With special reference to Sharankumar Limbale’s ‘The Outcaste, Akkarmashi’ and Omprakash
Valmiki’s ‘Joothan: A Dalit’s Life’)
Sunil Ramteke
Assistant Professor of English
Santaji Mahavidyalaya, Nagpur

Abstract:
Dalit autobiographies are portrayal of real Dalit life experiences through which Dalits have been
undergoing through the ages. These autobiographies put forth the pain, agony, discrimination and
rejection of Dalits by Savarna people. These autobiographies are testimonies of three phases
through which Dalit protagonist shows his reaction towards the exploitative system. These are
pain, protest and rejection or denial. The present paper throws light on the myths used by the
autobiographers to expose the unequal social order prevalent in India. The paper is written with an
sole objective to throw light on the myths used by the autobiographers Sharankumar Limbale and
Omprakash Valmiki in their autobiographies ‘The Outcaste, Akkarmashi’ and Omprakash
Valmiki’s ‘Joothan: A Dalit’s Life’. In this paper the attempt will be made to reveal the purpose
of autobiographers in using those myths.
Key Words: Dalit autobiography, agony, poverty, discrimination, Dalit Protagonist, protest,
Sharankumar Limbale, Omprakash Valmiki, The Outcaste, Joothan: A Dalit’s Life, etc.

Introduction:
In classical Greek, “mythos” signified any story or plot, whether true or invented. In its central
modern significance, however, a myth is one story in a mythology, a system of hereditary stories
of ancient origin which were once believed to be true by a particular cultural group. (Abrams and
Harpham)
Dalit autobiographies are real life stories and experiences of Dalits written by Dalits with Dalit
consciousness. These autobiographies throw light on three aspects: pain, protest and rejection.
Therefore, it would be surprising for the readers to know that Dalit autobiographies are replete
with myths. Very few Dalit autobiographies used myths. The present paper throws light on the
myths used in Sharankumar Limbale’s ‘The Outcaste, Akkarmashi’ and Omprakash Valmiki’s
‘Joothan: A Dalit’s Life’ respectively.

1
Brief Information about ‘The Outcaste’ and ‘Joothan’:
Sharankumar Limbale’s autobiography ‘The Outcaste, Akkarmashi’ was originally written in
Marathi as ‘Akkarmashi’ (1984) and translated into English by Santosh Bhoomkar as ‘The
Outcaste, Akkarmashi’ (2003).
Sharankumar Limbale’s autobiography ‘The Outcaste, Akkarmashi’ throws light on the life of
Sharan, the protagonist of the story who took birth as an illegitimate son born out of the union of
Upper caste Patil Hanmanta Limbale and Masamai Kamble, the divorced wife of Ithal Kamble, a
Mahar peasant working on the farmland of Hanmanta Limbale. The stigma of illegitimacy makes
the life of Sharan worst to live. He was not accepted by his biological father Hanmanta Limbale
and not even by Mahar community of which his mother Masamai belonged to. He had to undergo
humiliation by upper caste boys and girls in the school and also denial of him by the Mahar
community when he used to go to community hall. Sharankumar Limbale, couldn’t decide his
identity. He is always in search of identity as the identity of a person in India is decided not on the
worth of a person but on the basis of caste, creed, race and class. Sharankumar Limbale’s ‘The
Outcaste, Akkarmashi’ is a story of the struggle of the protagonist to face all the odds in life and
reaching to the dignified position.
Omprakash Valmiki’s ‘Joothan: A Dalit’s Life’ is an autobiography originally written
in Hindi as ‘Joothan’ and translated into English by Arun Prabha Mukherjee as ‘Joothan: A Dalit’s
Life’. Omprakash Valmiki, the protagonist of the story, born in a Chuhra community, the
untouchable caste in Uttar Pradesh suffers much in his life to attain the life as a dignified human
being. The title of the autobiography speaks a lot about the discrimination and humiliation of
Dalits by upper caste people. In his introduction to the book translator Arun Prabha Mukherjee
finds no synonym to the word ‘Joothan’. He writes the difficulty he faces in finding out the
alternative word to ‘Joothan’. He says:
The Hindi word ‘Joothan’ literally means food left on an eater’s plate, usually destined for
the garbage pail in a middle class home. However, such food would only be characterized
‘Joothan’ if someone else besides the original eater were to eat it. The word carries the
connotations of ritual purity and pollution as ‘jootha’ means polluted. I feel that English
equivalents such as ‘leftovers’ or ‘leavings’ cannot substitute for joothan. (Valmiki)

The title captures the pain, humiliation and poverty of Valmiki’s community, which not only has
to rely on joothan but also relished it. Valmiki gives a detailed description of collecting, preserving
and eating joothan. Valmiki’s Joothan is a story of his struggle to achieve the success in life as a
dignified human being.
Myths Used in The Outcaste:
Indian society revers the mythological literature like epics, hymns as sacred. The
mythological stories are chanted, held in esteem and told to the common Indians as the sacred
religious texts. The epics like the Ramayana, the Mahabharata and the tales like the Jataka tales,
the Panchtantra tales, etc. have a great influence over Indians. The epics like the Ramayana and
2
the Mahabharata are the sacred lore for Hindus. These two epics have the sanctity of scriptures of
Hindus. The characters depicted in these epics have a great sway over the minds of the people.
However, these two great epics have given no respectable place to the communities which were
kept below the last rung of Varna order. The characters like Karna, Eklavya, Shambuka,
Shurpanakha,Jarasandha, Ravana, Indrajit, etc. are treated as despised human beings. Few
characters have been ascribed the name Rakshas i.e. devilish. The characters belonging to the
people of higher Varna in Varna order like Rama, Krushna, Arjuna, Bhima, Laxmana etc. are
portrayed in such a way that the people show respect and sympathy towards them.
In the autobiography of Sharankumar Limbale, the protagonist Sharan, the
illegitimate son whenever tries to ask the question to his mother about his father she used to avoid
his question. Sharan relates his fate with the fate of Karna and his mother’s fate with the fate of
Kunti, the wife of King Pandu. He narrates this predicament in the following words,
“Instead of answering me, my mother clammed up like Kunti. At such moments I felt a kinship
with Karna. I felt we were brothers. Many times I felt I was Valmiki, Joothan Karna myself
because, like him, I too was drifting with the flow of river”. (Limbale)
Kunti, the wife of Pandu the Pandava King was blessed by the Sun God to fulfill the wish she
asked for. Kunti before being married to King Pandu of Hastinapur goes to the river and prays God
to have her a son bright like him. Her wish was fulfilled by the Sun God but after realization that
the unmarried women cannot have a son and will be looked upon by the society in a negative light
she unwillingly puts the newly born sun in a box and let it flow in the current of river. Later the
baby boy was saved by the person named Adhirath who was in the service of the Pandava King
Dhrutrashtra. Karna was very expert in archery but he was not allowed to participate in a
Swayamvara. He was not given his legitimate right of the elder son of Kunti the queen of Pandu,
the Pandava Prince. The myth of Kunti and Karna are used here to show the helpless, neglected
and deprived and humiliated lives of Masamai, Sharan’s mother and Sharan himself. Sharan, being
the illegitimate son was treated badly by the society and his mother was looked upon as a whore.
They do not find a respectable place in society. Therefore, the myth used by Sharankumar Limbale
equating his mother with Kunti and himself to Karna reveal their place in the society which was
not very respectable.
In another place the protagonist says that he was growing like a Karna in the
Mahabharata.(p.37) The epic Mahabharata has a great impact in the lives of Indians who belonged
to Hindu religion. Hence, Sharankumar Limbale takes the help of the character of Karna and Kunti
in the epic to show their lower position in the society.
In another place he compares himself with the mythical character, Jarasandha, the King of
Magadha portrayed in the epic Mahabharata. Jarasandha was a very powerful king of Magadha.
He was a descendant of King Brihadratha,the founder of the Brihadratha dynasty of Magadha. The
word Jarasandha is a combination of two Sanskrit words Jara and Sandha, ‘joining’. Jara, a Vana-
durga put the two halves of Jarasandha together after finding them by a tree. In return for saving
Brihadratha’s son, he was named Jarasandha after her. The meaning of Jarasandha is ‘the one who
is joined by Jara’.
Sharan, being the illegitimate son was not accepted by his biological father, Hanmanta Limbale as
the son of Masamai, the Mahar women. He was also hated by the people of Mahar community as

3
he did not belong to them, too. He was brought by his grandmother, Santamai, who was living
with a Muslim man, Muhamood Dastagir Jamadar. Sharan failed to find his identity. He does not
know whether he was a Lingayat, Muslim, Mahar or Buddhist. He was torn apart. He was
bewildered to find a definite identity for himself. He puts his predicament in the following words:
My father and forefathers were Lingayats. Therefore, I am one too. My mother’s father
and forefathers were Mahar, hence I am also a Mahar. From the day I was born until
today. I was brought up by my grandfather Mahmood Dastagir Jamadar. My grandfather
in the sense he lives with my grandmother, Santamai. Does this mean I am Muslim as
well? Then why can’t the Jamadar’s affection claim me as Muslim? How can I be high
caste when my mother is untouchable? If I am untouchable, what about my father who is
high caste? I am like Jarasandh. Half of me belong to the village, whereas the other half
is excommunicated. (p.38-39)

Myth used in Joothan:

In Omprakash Valmiki’s Joothan the autobiographer used the myth from the epic Mahabharata.
Omprakash, being the son of untouchable chuhra was treated by the teacher badly. The Headmaster
Kaliram, who belong to high caste never thought Omprakash to be worthy to take education to
take education like the boys of upper caste. Therefore, he ordered him to sweep the ground of the
school as he was belonged to the sweeper community. His father fortunately was passing by the
school at that time. He gets angry and snatched the broom from his hand and threw it away. The
autobiographer narrates the anger of his father in the following words:
“His eyes were blazing. Pitaji who was always taut as a bowstring in front of others was so angry
that his dense moustache was fluttering. He began to scream, ‘Who is that teacher, that progeny of
Dronacharya, who forces my son to Sweep?”(p.6)
Dronacharya, the teacher of the Kaurava and Pandava Prince had special affection for Arjuna, the
Pandava Prince. He wanted to make him the best archers. Meanwhile he encountered with a boy
belonged to a jungle tribe shows a great skill in archery. Eklavya learnt the skill of archery not
directly from Dronacharya but he learnt it by practicing it in presence of the statue of Dronacharya.
He used to revere him as his Guru. Eklavya told Dronarcharya how he had taken inspiration from
him to learn the skill of archery. Dronacharya, the Guru of Pandava and Kaurava saw the hurdle
in the form of Eklavya in making his disciple, Arjuna the best Archer. Hence, he asked for the gift
from Eklavya. Eklavya was the obedient and simple disciple agreed to offer him a gift.
Dronacharya, cunningly asked the thumb of right hand of Eklavya as his Guru Dakshina. In this
way, Dronacharya deprived Eklavya from becoming the best archer.
Omprakash’s father saw the same machination by Headmaster Kaliram to deprive him from taking
education.
In another occasion Master Saheb was teaching the lesson on Dronacharya. He told
them, almost with tears in his eyes, that Dronacharya had fed flour dissolved in water to his
famished son, Ashwatthama, in lieu of milk. The whole class had responded with great emotion to

4
this story of Dronacharya’s dire poverty. This episode was penned by Vyasa, the author of the
Mahabharata to highlight Drona’s poverty. Omprakash Valmiki suddenly dared to ask a question
to the master, “So Ashwatthama was given flour mixed in water instead of milk, but what about
us who had to drink mar? How come we were never mentioned in any epic? Why didn’t an epic
poet ever write a word on our lives?”(p.23)
The question asked by Omprakash raised eyebrows of the students and teacher. It was a
meaningless point in the eyes of the teacher. It was against the tradition to raise a question on the
validity and sanctity of the epic which was held in esteem by the Hindus. He scolded him, “Darkest
Kaliyuga has descended upon us so that an untouchable is daring to talk back.”(p.23)
The teacher punished him to stand in the murga or rooster pose.
The question of Omprakash was valid that the sacred text has given the space to the poverty-
stricken people of upper caste but the writers failed to give a space to the poverty-stricken life of
untouchables. For them the life of untouchables had no significance. It was even a crime to ask a
question why they had not given a space in those ancient literature. The autobiographer compares
the life of Aswatthama and the lives of the children of the untouchables. For him the life of
Aswatthama was better than theirs.

Conclusion:
After analyzing the myth used by Sharankumar Limbale and Omprakash Valmiki it has been
found that both these autobiographers made use of these myths and mythological characters to
equate and compare their position in the society. They tried to find the similarity between the
mythological characters portrayed in the epic and themselves. The life of untouchables was like
the lives of those mythological characters who were deprived of the opportunities to prosper in
their lives. The society, the custom and the inhuman social order pose hurdle in the path of their
progress. The sole purpose of the myths used by the writers was to make the people aware about
the conditions of Dalits in Indian society. The second purpose of these myths is to expose the
culture and tradition of India which was held in esteem by many but in fact it is a culture of
humiliation, torture, injustice and discrimination and deprivation of opportunity to the larger
section of society. The third purpose of the use of myths is to have sympathetic consideration
towards untouchable or Dalits of India and to provide opportunities for them to progress, prosper
and develop their personalities. It is also the purpose of the autobiographers to let the Savarna
people understand the pain, agony and marginalization of Dalits and to arouse a good feeling
among the high caste people for their untouchable brothers and to treat them equally as the
dignified human beings.

5
Works Cited
Abrams, M.H. and Geoffrey Galt Harpham. A Glossary of Literary Terms. New Delhi: Cengage Learning
India Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi, 2015. Print.

Limbale, Sharankumar. The Outcaste Akkarmashi. Trans. Santosh Bhoomkar. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press, 2003. Print.

Valmiki, Omprakash. Joothan A Dalit's Life. Trans. Arun Prabha Mukherjee. Kolkata: Samya, an imprint of
Bhatkal and Sen, 2007. Print.