
The times today we live in, it would be likely that a child would have mastered how to use facebook or twitter, but may still fail to recognize who Dronacharya was. For those, he was the guru of the Pandavas in Mahabharata. His acumen in archery was such that if he taught this art, his pupils were guaranteed to excel. So in today’s terms, if he was to be made of the Indian Archery team in Olympics, it would assure us a gold medal in all the relevant events.
Which act of his, did our SC condemn? If you have not read the Mahabharata, I strongly recommend you to read it. Of course if you have no time, I will cut the long story short for you. Dronacharya’s favorite pupil was Arjuna. His bias towards Arjuna was such that he could barely stand any archer better than him. In the backdrop of this, Ekalavya, who didn’t have the royal blood like Arjuna did, mastered this art. That being the reason, Dronacharya wouldn’t teach him. But for his reputation as a master, Ekalavya worshipped his statue and practiced rigorously to enhance his skills. And when Dronacharya came across such a self proclaimed student, who was from a lower caste, had never taken a lesson but was probably way better an archer then the great Arjuna was, he just couldn’t digest these facts. And when such a student offered him any gift of his choice, he demanded for his thumb, which would leave him with no further ability as an archer. But being a devoted student, Ekalavya did this with pleasure. This act which displayed egoistic nature of the guru, bigotry, and a weird degree of injustice is certainly condemnable.


