Answer: Bayaji and Yetalya, both representing the Mahar community, are the victims of the caste system. Bayaji appears to be an extension of Yetalaya because of his progressive thinking and the new way of life that his conversion to Buddhism has given him. Bayaji is also more advanced in his ideas and much less threatened at the sight of wicked Bhajuba, the ‘high class’ villan. He holds his self-esteem high and dares to wish Bhajuba in an unconventional manner, saying “Greetings to you, sir, how are things with you?’, and not “my humble salutations to you, sir, who are my father and mother.’ This address is quite unlike that of the manner in which Yetalya wishes Patil in “The Poisoned Bread”, addressing himself by demeaning terms like “slave”, and “Begging Mahar” and certainly not as one “claiming equality.” The protagonists achieve a different purpose. Yetalya represents poverty, suffering, slavery and tribulations that the Dalits endured for thousands of years and which pervades the Dalit Literature as a theme. Bayaji stands for the awakened consciousness, instilled in the Dalit community at the call of Dr. Ambedkar. Yetalya is submissive and finds his place only in the feet of Bapu Patil, the upper caste man, even ready to be “kicked”, while Bayaji even feels “tempted to knock him (Bhujaba) down with his box” at his insolent behaviour but avoids the clash not wanting to be violent, as violence was not a way with the Dalit movement which sought to fulfil its aims by “peaceful means”, so Ambedkar said in his speech at Mahad Satyagraha. Bayaji considers it a good policy by not “incurring the hostility of anyone in the village” as he was there for the rest of his life and did believe in peaceful coexistence with everyone, an understanding that owes greatly to his affiliation to Buddhism. Bayaji thus decides against the plan to make a storeyed house at the threat of Kondiba Patil, not willing to offend him unnecessarily and builds a “concealed” storey serving his own purpose too. Both the characters, in a way, try their best not to incur the fury of their upper class lords: Yetalya finding “no escape from the hereditary holding” and Bayaji “making the best of things” in the interest of both the parties. But the way both these characters meet their end in the respective stories is an eye-opener and converging of the basic idea of the writers behind their portrayal. Both the characters fall prey to the viciousness of the system and die a tragic death. But the irony is, that it is only at the time of their death that both of them realize the worthlessness of the life of submission and slavery that they led, and not willing to let the same submissive tendency percolate down to their younger generation, they leave a strong message for them. Both the characters ignite a spark in the mind of their young generation. Yetalya’s dying words to his grandson: “Never depend on the age-old bread associated with our caste. Get as much education as you can. Take away this accursed bread from the mouths of Mahars. This poisonous bread will finally kill the very humanness of man”, find a clear correspondence to the last words of Bayaji, expressed as his “last wish” to his sons: “I want you to build a storeyed house. I have no other wish.” The depiction of the younger generation too, in both the stories is quite similar. While the grandson of Yetalaya is a “city-bred” boy who has received education, Bayaji’s sons are also educated and are “doing well” – one of them being a school teacher, two in the government service and one still studying. The rebel in the educated Mhadeva, enabling him to question, rips apart the soul of the rotten system in his arguments and counter arguments with Patil as well as his reasoning with Yetalya. The ability to know and understand things and his belief in the possibility of a ‘change’ in the situation make him protest against the conventional and obsolete modes of thinking and living. Bent upon ending the suffering of many like him, Mahadeva tries to convince his grandpa that it is surely possible to break away from the chain of land-bondage which is taken as hereditary by Mahars and is accepted as an established norm without questioning. Mahadeva was “inflamed with a sense of fury and disgust, prompted to retaliate”. This implied retaliation of Mhadeva finds a striking parallel in the retaliation of the sons of Bayaji, who, exactly like Mahadeva, rise above their grief and sorrow at the death of their father, and joined by each other, start digging the ground to start “on a house, not one with a concealed first floor but a regular two-storeyed house.” Like Mahadeva, it is their “retaliation” that they start digging the foundation of a new two storeyed house. The young generation in both the stories, which ‘rejects’ and ‘revolts’, it represents a collective consciousness of millions of Dalits.
0 Comments