BR Ambedkar

BR Ambedkar

INTRODUCTION
Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (14 April 1891 – 6 December 1956), popularly also recognized
as Babasaheb, was an Indian jurist, political leader, philosopher, anthropologist, historian, orator,
economist, teacher, editor, prolific writer, revolutionary and a revivalist for Buddhism in India. He
was also the chief architect of the Indian Constitution.

Born into a poor Mahar (measured an Untouchable caste) family, Ambedkar campaigned
against social discrimination, the system of Chaturvarna – the categorization of Hindu civilization
into four varnas – and the Hindu caste system. He converted to Buddhism and is also credited with
providing a spark for the transformation of hundreds of thousands of Dalits or untouchables to
Theravada Buddhism.

Ambedkar was posthumously awarded the Bharat Ratna, India's highest civilian award, in
1990. Overcoming numerous social and financial obstacles, Ambedkar became one of the first Dalit
(untouchables) to obtain a college education in India. Eventually earning a law degree and
doctorates for his revise and research in law, economics and political science from Columbia
University and the London School of Economics, Ambedkar gained a reputation as a scholar and
practiced law for a few years, later campaigning by publishing journals advocating political rights and
social freedom for India's untouchables.

Ambedkar is the tallest leader of dalits in India. No other dalit leader could achieve what
Ambedkar could achieve for his community(Dhananjaya Keer – writer of biography of Ambedkar).
Ambedkar is also a controversial personality like Sir Sayed Ahmed Khan.

IDEOLOGICAL ORIENTATION
• He thought that liberalism upheld a narrow conception of freedom which tolerated huge
accumulation of resources in a few hands and the deprivation and exploitation that it bred.
• He argued that liberal systems conceal deep inequalities of minorities such as the conditions of
the Blacks in U.S.A. and Jews in Europe.
• Liberal stress on the individual and ignored community bonds and the necessity of the latter to
sustain a reflective and creative self.
• He felt that the principle of equality before law is truly a great advance as compared to the
inegalitarian orders that it attempted to supplant but it is not adequate.
• He argued that a good society demands extensive public ownership of the means of production
and equal opportunity to everyone to develop his or her self to the fullest extent.
• He further argued that a desirable political order can be created only by acknowledging a moral
domain which he saw eminently expressed in the Buddha's teachings.

For More Study Material, Visit: studyiq.com Page no.

1
 BR Ambedkar

• Ambedkar felt that rights and humanity cannot be left to the mercy and prejudices of people
who have developed a vested interest in undermining them.

AMBEDKAR AS ANTI-NATIONALIST
Arun Shourie in his book, WORSHIPPING FALSE
GODS has called Ambedkar ‘anti-national’. He has
given following reasons.
1. Ambedkar opposed Purna Swaraj resolution of
1929.
2. On 8th Aug 1930, Ambedkar held that
depressed classes should be grateful towards
British for improving their status.
3. Ambedkar directed dalits to stay away from
a)Gandhi’s Harijana Sevak Sanghs
b)To stay away from Indian National Congress.
4. Ambedkar called Poona Pact as Himalayan
blunder;he wanted separate electorates for
dalits.
5. Ambedkar criticized ‘Quit India Movement’ as
‘Mad-venture of Gandhi’.
6. Ambedkar supported Jinnah’s demand for
Pakistan.
7. Ambedkar wanted Britisher’s to stay.
8. Ambedkar joined the defence advisory
committee formed by British as well as
Viceroy’s executive council which was setup to gain legitimacy for British efforts.

Thus, on above basis, certain sections of Indian political class and intellectuals call Ambedkar
anti-nationalist. Like Sir Sayed Ahmed Khan, Ambedkar also emerged as the leader of the community
rather than leader of the Nation. Ambedkar himself held that between interests of the dalits and
interest of the nation, I will give preference to the interest of dalits.

AMBEDKAR AS A NATIONALIST
However according to Arundhati Roy and Christophe Jaffrelot, it will be
wrong to call Ambedkar anti-national for the following reasons:
• Ambedkar represented the largest section of Indian society(Bahujana
samaj).
• Person representing largest section of the nation cannot be regarded
as anti-national.
• On the status of India as a Nation, Ambedkar’s approach was as
practical as that of JyotibaPhule.
• It was difficult for Ambedkar to accept a society divided into castes as a nation. The concept of
Nation, according to Ambedkar is based on the trinity of liberty, fraternity and equality. There
can be no nation without this trinity.
• However it does not mean that there was no desire in Ambedkar that India should not emerge
as a nation. In his speech to the constituent assembly in Dec 1946, he held that ‘I know, we are
divided politically, economically and socially. We are group of a warring camps, I myself is a
leader of one such camp.’ However I am convinced that a day will come, when we will forget
these differences and emerge as a nation.

For More Study Material, Visit: studyiq.com Page no.

2
 BR Ambedkar

• Ambedkar believed that sooner we accept that we are not a Nation, better it is, at least we will
start thinking how to become a nation by understanding the reasons that we are not a nation.

LIFE OF AMBEDKAR
• Ambedkar belonged to the community of untouchables in Maharashtra. Hence he had first hand
experience of what it means to be untouchable in India.
• Ambedkar was fortunate
enough to get opportunity to
gain western education.
• He earned the degree in law
and started practicing law in
Mumbai. However, because
of his caste, nobody
approached Ambedkar for
his services. Hence
Ambedkar realized that even
when Dalits are educated,
they will not be able to live
the life of dignity.
• Hence, he believed that
untouchability has to be abolished to address the exploitation of Dalits.
• He dedicated himself for the cause of the abolition of untouchability by raising awareness
amongst Dalits.
• He brought magazine MUKANAYAK, he brought newspaper BAHISHKRIT BHARAT.
• He established Bahishkrit Hitkarni Sabha, All India Depressed Classes Federation which was
renamed as Republican Party of India.
• Ambedkar also adopted Gandhian technique of Satyagraha.
• He organized Mahad satyagraha, he asserted the rights of untouchables to take water from the
same well, which is used by ‘caste Hindus’.
• Ambedkar was disappointed as he could not get thesupport of Gandhi for his satyagraha. Gandhi
held that for the time being satyagraha should be used only against colonial authorities.
• Ultimately Ambedkar felt that it is better for untouchables to take the help of British state in
improving their status.
• Ambedkar never believed in commitment of Gandhi towards upliftment of untouchables. One of
the grievances of Ambedkar against Gandhi has been that Gandhi never kept any fast for
abolition of untouchability.

AMBEDKAR’S IDEAS
CONCEPT OF CASTE
• Ambedkar’s main work revolves around the abolition of caste. His most important work on the
issue of abolition of caste is ANNIHILATION OF CASTE.
• Ambedkar was not satisfied with the explanations related to caste system found in religious
texts. Ambedkar attempted the scientific understanding of the origin of caste on the basis of
anthropological researches. His important works on the issue include CASTE IN INDIA, WHO
WERE SUDRAS, ORIGIN OF UNTOUCHABILITY.
• Ambedkar also rejected the theory of Aryan invasion. As per the theory of Aryan invasion, upper
caste have been the Aryans whereas so called untouchables were the original inhabitants, often
mentioned as dasas or dasyus.
• There is no such historical evidence, it means all caste in India had common origin.

For More Study Material, Visit: studyiq.com Page no.

3
 BR Ambedkar

• Ambedkar rejected the view of Manusmriti according to which different varnas originated from
the different parts of Viratapurusa as mentioned in Rig-Veda also. In Manusmriti, untouchables
are mentioned as chandals.
• Chandals are those who are the offspring of Shudra father and Brahmin mother, which shows
the pollution of Brahmins by Shudras. The entire concept of untouchability is based on purity
and pollution.
• Ambedkar had also explained the origin of Sudras. As per Ambedkar’s theory, there were only
three varnas – Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaisyas.
• Sudras were originally Kshatriyas. However they were those Kshatriyas, which did not accept the
hegemony of Brahmins, hence Brahmins stopped Upanayanasanskar for this group. Upanayana
sanskar is linked to purification. Hence it was believed that they remain polluted.

AMBEDKAR’S EXPLANATION OF UNTOUCHABILITY

• Ambedkar has used the term Dalits. The term Dalit come from Marathi word dal. Dal denotes
broken. Ambedkar calls Dalit as broken men.
• According to Ambedkar, there used to be tribal way of life, there used to be tribal wars.
Gradually some tribes started settled life.
• When settled life started, agriculture started. This started the practice of cattle rearing and not
killing cattle for food as it was not needed.
• Initially the main wealth used to be cattle, but now it became land. There were certain tribes
which remained nomadic. These tribes continue to remain dependent on cattle even for food.
Many of such tribes were defeated and got scattered. Thus they became broken and weak.
• Settled tribes did not include these tribes within their society. Since they lacked land, they were
made dependent on the settled tribes.
• There was a contract between those who were living in the village and those who were settled
on the outskirts of the village. Those on the outskirt will watch and ward the security of the
people in the village.
• According to Hindu literature, dalits were called antyaja because they were last to take birth
from body of Bramha. Ambedkar does not accept the explanation and suggest that they were
called antyaja because they were living outside village.
• According to Ambedkar, these tribes have accepted Buddhism. Brahmins targeted these tribes
out of anger because these tribes insisted on remaining Buddhist.
• Hence Ambedkar believes that the practice of untouchability is also because of anger and the
rivalry between Brahmins and Buddhists. Ambedkar even mentions that originally beef eating
was not prohibited but to regain the lost stage, Brahmins stopped eating non-vegetarian food.
This made them to claim Brahmins as pure.
• Ambedkar even mentions that exogamy was not prohibited among varnas. This practice was
started later by Brahmins to show their exclusiveness.
• According to him, there is no pure blood on the subcontinent. Intermixing of blood had already
taken place much before the origin of caste system.
• Ambedkar does not consider untouchables as a part of Hindu society, since they have been
socially segregated, they should also be politically segregated.
• According to him, any amount of economic equality will not help. No upliftment is possible
without rejection of Hindu social order. Hinduism as a religion and caste system as a social
order has ruined Dalits. He even believed that the social order will ultimately ruin Hindus
themselves. It will ruin India itself.

AMBEDKAR ON HINDUISM/ BRAHMANISM

• It is because of caste system where person’s status is based on worth, Hinduism cannot be
‘missionary religion’. Hinduism cannot go for conversions like Islam or Christianity.

For More Study Material, Visit: studyiq.com Page no.

4
 BR Ambedkar

• He held that Hindus cannot form a nation. They are segmented communities and warring
tribes.
• He held that Hindus are race of losers. They will continue to lose to other religions. Thus caste
system is not just responsible for the exploitation of Dalits but is responsible for the weakness
of India as a nation.
• According to him, Hinduism is nothing but Brahmanism. It is a hegemony of Brahmins. Core
idea of Hinduism is endogamy. Hence without destroying endogamy, caste system cannot end.
• Hence biggest anger of Brahmins will be against inter-caste marriages. According to him,
Hinduism is not a religion but madness. He held that ‘I had no choice but being born as Hindu.
However it is in my capacity not to die as Hindu. The religion which force poor to remain poor,
uneducated, which allows man to touch the excreta of cow but not touch the fellow human
being is nothing but madness’.
• In other societies, inequality is social, in Hinduism there is a justification of inequality even in
philosophy.
• According to him, Hindus are not bad people; their main problem is they are highly religious.
Hence even Hindu social reformers would not be successful. There is nothing in Hinduism except
caste system.
• One cannot reject caste being Hindu. Annihilation of caste requires rejection of Hinduism. Hence
he held that there is a need to put dynamite on Vedas and Manusmriti.
• Hence Ambedkar appealed to reject Hinduism. Ambedkar converted to Buddhism on 14th Nov
1956. Ambedkar held that ‘I disown the religion of my birth. I am reborn. I reject religion which
treats me inferior.’ On the issue of conversion, there was disagreement between Gandhi and
Ambedkar.

GANDHI - AMBEDKAR DIFFERENCES

• Gandhi believed that if person is born in a particular religion, there is a divine will. One can
accept good things from other religions but one should not leave one’s religion.
• On the other hand, Ambedkar wanted to convert. He even explored conversion in Islam and
Christianity but ultimately found spiritual satisfaction in Buddhism.
• Ambedkar and Gandhi also had debate over Varna system. Gandhi believed Varna system as
division of labour. It is a feature of even advanced societies. However Gandhi rejected caste
system. Gandhi was also against untouchability.
• Ambedkar held that Gandhi’s description is too idealistic, textual. Varna is a text, caste in
context. In reality varna exists as caste.
• Caste is not the division of labour, it is a division of labourers. It is also not a sensible economic
system. Profession is not based on merit but based on birth.
• Gandhi’s impracticality is evident as Gandhi himself was not observing his varna dharma. Hence
abolition of caste and varna is same.
• Ambedkar criticized Harijana Sevak Sangh formed by Gandhi. He compared Harijana Sevak
Sanghs with Putna(the mythological character sent to kill Krishna by nursing poison in the form
of milk)
• Ambedkar had objection with respect to the use of the word Harijana. According to Ambedkar,
it is a misleading term because it does not tell the real status of untouchables in Indian society. It
may push them into ‘false consciousness’.
• Hence Ambedkar preferred to use the term dalits and depressed classes.

If Gandhi was father of nation, Ambedkar was father of constitution. The two leaders had similar
aims though their paths were different. Arundhati Roy addresses Gandhi as saint and Ambedkar as
Doctor.

For More Study Material, Visit: studyiq.com Page no.

5
 BR Ambedkar

DALIT REVOLUTION
Ambedkar has analyzed the relevance of Marxist mode of revolution in Indian situations. He found
that this method is not appropriate.
Why?
• The basic structure of Indian society is not economic rather ideological. Brahminism forms the
basic structure and hence just economic upliftment will not give them a life of dignity.
• Hence he suggested annihilation of caste by putting dynamite on Vedas and Manusmriti.
• Thus Dalits will have to work for building ‘counter-hegemony’.
• Ambedkar was influenced by liberal scholars like John Dewey. A lawyer by profession, Ambedkar
had faith in constitutional methods.
• According to him, society in India is more exploitative and hence the state can work for Dalits.
He favoured state led affirmative action.
• In this context also his view was different from Gandhi. Gandhi favoured Panchayati Raj, Gandhi
was against state led model of development and proposed idea of village republic. Ambedkar
found Gandhi’s approach too idealistic. He held that Indian villages are ‘den of ignorance’ where
caste system is most entrenched.
• Modernists like Pandit Nehru, Ambedkar preferred state led approach.
• Ambedkar knew that the change in the status of Dalits requires the emergence of consciousness
among Dalits themselves. Hence he brought magazines and newspapers, established societies
for generating awareness. Ambedkar’s mantra for Dalits was ‘agitate, educate and organize’.

AMBEDKAR’S IDEA OF SOCIAL JUSTICE

• The issue of social justice has been not only the concern of political philosophers, but political
leaders also. Ambedkar’s idea of social justice has to be seen in context of the peculiar forms of
injustices found in Indian society.
• The basic composition of India society has been based on caste. According to Ambedkar caste
system is a graded system of hierarchy where the life of people at the lowest levels is like a hell.
• Ambedkar belonged to the community of untouchables/antyaja. The most depressed section.
• Social justice for Ambedkar meant a life of dignity to this section of the society. According to
Ambedkar, social justice requires annihilation of caste. Since caste is the basic structure of Hindu
society, it also means rejection of Hinduism,for Ambedkar Hinduism is not a religion but
‘madness’.
• Ambedkar knew that caste Hindus will not be able to come out of caste system hence the
practical approach to justice in Indian context shall be compensatory justice.
• Ambedkar believed political power is necessary for the empowerment of untouchables. Hence
Ambedkar advocated separate electorate, though ultimately succumbed to the pressure by
Gandhi and finally agreed for reservations.
• Ambedkar’s idea of social justice embraced the concerns of India’s subaltern class, the bahujana
samaj. It included the concerns of untouchables, shudras, tribal, minorities,women, labourers
and peasants.
• It was Ambedkar’s idea of social justice which inspired him as a law minister to bring Hindu Code
Bill. Hindu Code Bill proposed by Ambedkar challenged the patriarchy present within Hindu
Personal Laws based on ‘Manuvaad’.
• The special rights which minorities have in India can be attributed to Ambedkar’s idea of social
justice.

AMBEDKAR’S CRITIQUE OF MARXISM

Ambedkar was influenced by Marx’s idea of social justice which aimed at ending the exploitation of
poor. However, Ambedkar felt that Marxist methods are not so relevant in Indian situations.
Ambedkar disagreed with Marx on two basic issues.

For More Study Material, Visit: studyiq.com Page no.

6
 BR Ambedkar

1. Marx’s conception of religion.

Ambedkar did not agree that all religions are ‘opium of masses’. Buddhism is not opium
ofmasses. Perhaps Marx didn’t know about Buddhism. Buddhismas a religion has a lot for the
nourishment of human soul. Untouchables can embrace Buddhism, Buddhism as a religion will
provide untouchables a source of inspiration, spiritual satisfaction and the creation of world
brotherhood. Buddhism is based on Karuna (Compassion), samata(Equality) and prajna
(Rejection of superstitions).
2. Ambedkar also disagreed with Marx with respect to state.
He didn’t accept Marx’s view that state is an instrument of exploitation. Society is more
exploitative than state and hence Ambedkar preferred affirmative action through the state.

CONSTITUTIONAL MORALITY
• In Ambedkar’s perspective, Constitutional morality would mean effective coordination
between conflicting interests of different people and administrative cooperation.
• It will help to resolve the conflict amicably without any confrontation amongst the various
groups working for the realization of their ends at any cost.
• According to him, for India, where society is divided on the basis of caste, religion, language, and
other factors, a common moral compass is needed, and the Constitution can play the role of that
compass.

VIEWS ON DEMOCRACY
• He had complete faith in democracy. While dictatorship may produce quick results, it can not
be a valid form of government. Democracy is superior as it enhances liberty. He supported
the parliamentary form of democracy, which aligns with other national leaders.
• He emphasized 'democracy as a way of life', i.e. democracy not only in the political sphere but
also in the personal, social and economic sphere.
• For him, democracy must bring a drastic change in social conditions of society, otherwise the
spirit of political democracy i.e. 'one man and one vote' would be missing. Democratic
government can arise only from a democratic society, so as long as caste hurdles exist in Indian
society, real democracy can not operate. So he focused on the spirit of fraternity and equality
as the base of democracy to bring out social democracy.
• Along with the social dimension, Ambedkar focused on the economic dimension also. While he
was influenced by liberalism and parliamentary democracy, he also found the limitation of
them. As per him, parliamentary democracy ignored social and economic inequality. It only
focused on liberty while true democracy must bring both liberty and equality.
Ambedkar focused on three categories of democracy in India that are
A. Political Democracy
B. Economic Democracy
C. Social Democracy

A )POLITICAL DEMOCRACY
Ambedkar located the political power in the people thinking of that it is the key to all social progress.
According to him, the soul of democracy is the doctrine of, “One man, one vote” and “one vote, one
value”. What he means each and every man to count for one. No man for more than one. Ambedkar
pointed out that there are four premises upon which political democracy rests:
1. The individual is an end in himself.
2. The individual has cetin inalienable rights which must be guaranteed to him by the Constitution.
3. The individual shall not be required to relinquish any of his Constitutional rights as a condition
precedent to the receipt of a privilege and.
4. The state shall not delegate power to private persons to govern others.

For More Study Material, Visit: studyiq.com Page no.

7
 BR Ambedkar

B )Economic Democracy
Economic democracy means that the economic needs of the people are to be satisfied. No person
should die in want of food, clothing and housing, if democracy is to live up to its principle of one
man, one value. He points out that the principle of graded inequality has been carried into the
economic field. He viewed that the democratic order must minimize the glaring inequalities in
society. In democratic society there must be neither an oppressed class nor an oppressor class. It is
the duty of the state to prevent the monopoly of the means of production in few hands. In his book,
‘States and Minorities’, he proposed for the adaptation of an economic political system as a new
venture to benefit the poor masses of our society. Ambedkar suggested the following proposals:
1. Agriculture shall be a state industry.
2. Land will belong to the state and shall be let out to villagers without distinction of caste or
creed.
3. There will be no landlord, no tenant and landless labourer.
4. Rapid industrialisation of economy under the complete supervision and control of the state
should be initiated

C )Social Democracy
Ambedkar viewed that social democracy means as a way of life which recognises liberty, equality
and fraternity as principle of life. They are not separate, they are union of trinity. Democracy, to him
is more than a form of government. It is a form of the organisation of society. There are two
essential conditions, which characterise a democratically constituted society.
1. The absence of stratification of society into four classes.
2. A social habit on the part of individuals and groups, which is ready for continuous readjustment
of recognition of reciprocity of interests.
He regarded a favorable social setting as a pre-requisite for the success of democracy: without this
democracy would not last long. The formal framework of democracy was of no value in itself and
would not be appropriate if there was no social democracy.

In his famous speech in Constituent Assembly Ambedkar pointed the importance of Political,
economic and social democracy by postulating the relationship between liberty, equality and
fraternity. According to Ambedkar, Political democracy could not last unless these lay at the base of
it. Social democracy recognized liberty, equality and fraternity as the principles of life. They formed
an inseparable trinity in a democratic social structure. Without equality, liberty would produce the
supremacy of the few over the many. Equality, without liberty, would kill individual initiative.
Without fraternity, liberty and equality could not become a natural course of social relationship. Thus
for political democracy to succeed, it needs to be based on social and economic democracy.

METHODS ADOPTED TO REMOVE UNTOUCHABILITY

1. Creating self-respect among untouchables by removing the myth of inherent pollution that has
influenced their minds.
2. Education:
For Babasaheb, knowledge is a liberating force. One of the reasons for the degradation of
untouchables was that they were denied the advantages of education. He criticized the British
for not doing enough for the education of the lower caste. He insisted on secular education to
instill values of liberty and equality among the students.
3. Economic progress:
He wanted untouchables to free themselves from the bondage of the village community and
traditional jobs. He wanted them to achieve new skills and start a new profession and move to
cities to take advantage of industrialization. He described villages as 'a sink of localism, a den
of ignorance, narrow mindedness, and communalism'.

For More Study Material, Visit: studyiq.com Page no.

8
 BR Ambedkar

4. Political strength:
He wanted untouchables to organize themselves politically. With political power, untouchables
would be able to protect, safeguard and introduce new emancipatory policies.
5. Conversion:
When he realized that Hinduism is not able to mend its ways, he adopted Buddhism and asked
his followers to do the same. For him, Buddhism was based on humanism and believed in the
spirit of equality and fraternity. “I’m reborn, rejecting the religion of my birth. I discard the
religion which discriminates between a man and a man and which treats me as an inferior”.
So at the social level, education; at the material level, new means of livelihood; at political level,
political organization; and the spiritual level, self-assertion, and conversion constituted an overall
program of the removal of untouchability.

RELEVANCE OF AMBEDKAR IN PRESENT TIMES

• Caste-based inequality in India still persists. While Dalits have acquired a political identity
through reservation and forming their own political parties, they lack behind in social
dimensions (health and education) and economic dimension.
• There has been a rise of communal polarization and communalization of politics. It is necessary
that Ambedkar's vision of constitutional morality must supersede religious morality to avoid
permanent damage to the Indian Constitution.

PREVIOUS YEAR QUESTIONS

• Dr. Ambedkar’s idea of social justice leads to ‘egalitarian justice’ as compared to Rawls’
‘justice as fairness’ which aims at the notion of ‘pure procedural justice’. Comment.-2022
• Ambedkar's ideas on constitutionalism-2020
• Discuss Ambedkar's ideas on annihilation of caste’.-2018
• Comment on: Dr. B. R. Ambedkar's idea of state socialism.-2016
• Examine Ambedkar's critique of Marxism-2013

SOURCES
● INDIAN POLITICAL THOUGHT BY OP GAUBA
● INDIAN POLITICAL THOUGHT BY VR MEHTA

For More Study Material, Visit: studyiq.com Page no.

9
 BR Ambedkar

SAYINGS THEORY

“Democracy in this country is like a summer

sapling. Without social unity, the roots of sapling
cannot be strengthened. If social unity is not
achieved, this summer sapling of democracy will
be rooted out with a gust of summer wind
“Democratic society is a prerequisite of a
democratic government.”

“Democracy is not merely a form of government.

It is essentially an attitude of respect and
reverence towards fellow men”
“We must make our political democracy a social
democracy as well. Political democracy cannot
last unless there lies at the lease of it social
democracy.”

For More Study Material, Visit: studyiq.com Page no.

10