Ambedkar Begins Social Activism

Ambedkar
sought to begin his practice as a barrister in India. However, his dire
financial situation precluded any such attempt until Naval Bhathena
came to his recuse once again. Thus, Ambedkar began to practice law in
June 1923, at the age of 32.

However, though he was highly
qualified, Ambedkar was still considered an untouchable, and upper caste
Hindus refused to have anything to do with him. What’s more, most
litigants who could afford to, chose European lawyers, since the mostly
European judges looked upon this favorably. Thus, Ambedkar’s clients
were primarily the poor and destitute who could not pay him fees.

Around
this time, Veer Savarkar the freedom fighter started the Hindu
Sanghatan for the upliftment of backward castes. Mahatma Gandhi also
began his harijan movement, and Ambedkar established the Bahishkrit
Hitakarini Sabha, for the same purpose. The Sabha was formally
recognized at a meeting on March 9, 1924 at Damodar Hall, Bombay, and
its managing committee members included to Sir C.H. Seetalved, an upper
caste Gujarati Hindu and a brilliant lawyer, M. Nissim, Justice of
Peace; Rustomji-Jinwala,; G.K. Nariman; Dr. R.P. Paranjape, the famous
mathematician; Dr. V.P. Chavan and Shri B.G. Kher who became the first
premier of the then Bombay Presidency. Dr. Ambedkar was the chairman.

The
principal aims of the Sabha were: to promote the spread of education
and culture amongst untouchables through libraries and study circles; to
improve the untouchables’ economic situation by establishing industrial
and agricultural colleges, and to highlight the untouchables’ grievance
before the government. The Sabha organized a hostel for untouchable
youths in Sholapur, established camps to promote a culture of reading an
acquiring knowledge and started a reading room and hockey club for
untouchables in Bombay. Ambedkar himself traveled from village to
village throughout the region of Bombay and Goa to encourage
untouchables to seek out their rights and work for social upliftment. He
also attended and presided over the first Provincial Depressed Classes
Conference held at Nipani in the Bombay Presidency and the first
conference for untouchables at Malwan. Dr. Ambedkar also started his
second fortnightly Marathi Paper Bahishkrit Bharat on April 3, 1927 to
keep the untouchables informed of situations and to attract enlightened
Hindus of the upper castes to his cause.

With his rapidly growing
profile, Dr. Ambedkar was appointed in January 1927 to the Bombay
Legislative Council as a member. Through the Legislative Council he
worked to raise the status of the untouchable class, and succeeded in
many attempts. For example, it was due in part to his efforts that in
1931, the Bombay Police opened up their recruitment to the depressed
classes. However, this time was not without personal loss for him, as he
lost his son Rajratna and daughter Indu.

Ambedkar’s Speech on the Caste System

Dr.
Ambedkar was well aware that only a complete restructuring of Hindu
society would abolish the scourge of untouchability. Unlike some others
who advocated that the caste system be left intact while merely wiping
out untouchability, Ambedkar called or total annihilation of the caste
system.
He spoke: “Some men say that they should be satisfied with
the abolition of untouchability only, leaving the caste system alone.
The aim of abolition of untouchability alone without trying to abolish
the inequalities inherent in the caste system is a rather low aim. Not
failure, but low aim is a crime, let us probe the evil to its very roots
and not be satisfied with mere palliatives to assuage our pain. If
disease is not rightly diagnosed, the remedy will be useless and the
cure may be delayed. Even if we suppose that the stigma of
untouchability is wiped out, what will be the status of the present day
untouchables? At the most, they will be treated as Shudras. And what are
the rights of the Shudras? The Smritis treat them as mere helots, and
the Smritis are the guides of the caste Hindus in the matter of
gradations in the caste system. Are you willing to be treated as
Shudras? Are you willing to accept the position of helots?

That
the caste system must be abolished if the Hindu society is to be
reconstructed on the basis of equality, goes without saying.
Untouchability has its roots in the caste system. They cannot expect the
Brahmins to rise in revolt against the caste system. Also we cannot
rely upon the non-Brahmins and ask them to fight our battle. Most of
these are more interested in bringing the Brahmins down rather than in
raising the level of the suppressed classes. They too want a class of
people on whom they can look down upon and have the satisfaction of not
being quite the under-dogs of the society. This means that we ourselves
must fight our battles, relying on ourselves. Untouchability has ruined
the untouchables, the Hindus and ultimately the nation as a whole. The
day the depressed classes gain their self-respect and freedom they would
contribute not only to their own prosperity but by their industry,
intellect and courage would also strengthen the prosperity of the
nation. A religion which discriminates between one of its followers and
another is partial and the religion which treats crores of its adherents
worse than dogs and criminals and inflicts upon them insufferable
disabilities is no religion at all. Religion is not the appellation of
such an unjust order. Religion and slavery are incompatible.”

In 1930, the
British government sensing the overwhelming hostility of the Indian
people to the British Raj, proposed a round table conference in which
they would discuss the framing of a constitution for India. Many Indian
leaders were invited to London to discuss matters pertaining to this,
including Sir M.R. Jayakar and Mohammad Ali Jinnah. Dr. Ambedkar was
invited to represent the depressed classes.

Ambedkar’s Speech at the Round Table Conference

On
November 12 that year, Ambedkar stood up to speak at the conference and
put forth his ideas as to what a fair constitution for the Indian
nation would include. “While I want to emphasise the fact that one fifth
of the total population of British India—a population as large as the
population of Britain has been reduced to a position worse than that of
serfs or slaves. However, I maintain that the untouchables in India were
also for replacing the existing Government by a Government of the
people, for the people and by the people.

When we compare our
present position with the one in pre-British days, we find that, instead
of marching on, we are marking time. Before the British, we were in the
loathsome condition due to our untouchability. Has the British
Government done anything to remove it? Our wrongs have remained as open
sore and they have not been righted, although 150 years of British rule
have rolled away. Of what good is such a government to anybody? We must
have a Government in which the men in power will give their undivided
allegiance to the best interests of the country. We must have a
Government in which men in power know where obedience will end and the
resistance will begin; will not be afraid to amend the social and
economic code of life which the dictates of justice and expediency so
urgently call for. The use of force is but temporary. I am afraid, it is
not sufficiently realised that in the present temper of the country, no
constitution will be workable which is not acceptable to the majority
of the people. The time when you were to choose and India was to accept,
is gone, never to return. Let the consent of the people and not the
accident of logic be the touchstone of your new constitution, if you
desire that it should be worked.”

The famous British newspaper,
the Sunday Chronicle paying a tribute to his efforts wrote: “At heart a
true nationalist, he had to put up a stern fight against the persuasive
coquetry of the British diehards -who were anxious to win him over to
their side and at the same time his task was made more difficult by his
anxiety to retain his brother delegate Rao Bahadur Srinivasan [who also
represented the depressed classes at the conference] within the
nationalist fold”.

This speech not only unsettled the British but
many of the Indians as well. Many newspapers carried the speech in their
morning editions, and several of England’s politicians were forced to
acknowledge that Ambedkar was a force to reckon with. The British
government even instituted an enquiry to investigate whether Ambedkar
was a revolutionary in the style of Veer Savarkar!

Gandhi and Ambedkar

The
second Round Table Conference began in London in September 1931, and
this time, Mahatma Gandhi was in attendance. Mahatma Gandhi made an
argument in favor of seeing the Indian National Congress as the sole
representative of the Indian people, since it had members of Hindu and
Muslim religions in its party in high positions. It also had members of
the depressed classes, and two of its presidents were women – Sarojini
Naidu, the Nightingale of India, and Annie Besant.

Ambedkar also
spoke on that day, and showed his far-sighted view of nationhood when he
took on the Indian Princes. Stating that in a free and democratic
India, there was no place for the princes to maintain separate fiefdoms,
he said that the princes could not be allowed to become part of the
nation if they wanted total non-interference in the internal affairs of
their state. Furthermore, he stated that the representatives of the
state in the future Indian parliament could not be decided by the
princes themselves but by the people of the states.

It is quite a
vindication of Ambedkar’s views that the Indian National Congress began
state units in each of the princely states to promote exactly these
views. Furthermore, independent India’s integrity was achieved only
thanks to the efforts of Sardar Vallabhai Patel who oversaw military
action against some reluctant princely states such as Hyderabad, which
held out against becoming a part of India.

Predictably, the
princes of the states were not amenable to Ambedkar’s views. The
Maharaja of Bikaner Sir Ganga Singh, said that the princely states could
not be expected to sign a blank cheque. Answering the king, Ambedkar
said that to concede to the demands of the princes would be to go
against the tenets of a free and democratic India. It must be mentioned
that this was among the first instances where the rights of the people
of the princely states was brought up in a public forum.

Ambedkar
also had several arguments with Gandhi about the representation of the
depressed classes. Gandhi was against separate representation for the
depressed classes since he believed that the Indian National Congress
would adequately represent them. He was also in favor of maintaining the
princely states as they were. Ironically, he was in favor of providing
reservations for Muslims in the central and state legislatures. Pandit
Madan Mohan Malviya was also on Gandhiji’s side and pointed out that if
the country had wiped out illiteracy, untouchability would cease to
exist. Ambedkar however pointed out that despite being among them most
educated people on the planet, he was still classed as an untouchable.
Ambedkar made it very clear to the Chairman of the Conference, the
British Prime Minister Radcliffe, that he would not allow the Indian
National Congress to hijack or undermine the rights and demands of the
depressed classes.

Gandhi’s and Ambedkar’s arguments grew heated
at one point, and even called for intervention from the British PM.
Soon, well-wishers of the two men brought them together for tea, at
which point Ambedkar acknowledged Gandhi’s intention to uplift the
depressed classes, and also his work in doing the same. However, he
pointed out that the two of them had entirely different ideas as to how
to go about it.

This difference continued and grew more
exacerbated with the announcement after the conference that separate
electorates would be granted to Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians,
Europeans and the depressed classes in India, with the result that
country would soon be balkanized. They were given separate seats in the
Provincial Assemblies and the right of double vote under which they were
to elect their own representatives and to vote also in the general
constituencies. All political leaders were against this balkanization,
though Ambedkar himself was in favor of a separate electorate for the
depressed classes. Gandhi went on a fast unto death asking the British
to repeal this recommendation of separate electorates. He was promptly
put in jail!

Ambedkar visited Gandhi in jail and was moved by his
pitiful health situation. Listening to Ambedkar’s arguments in favor of a
separate electorate for depressed classes, Gandhiji said, “You have my
fullest sympathy. I am with you Doctor, in most of the things you say.
But you say that what concerns you most is my life.” Dr. Ambedkar
answered, “Yes, Gandhiji, in the hope that you would devote yourself
solely to the cause of my people, and become our hero too.” Gandhi
replied, “Well then if it is so, then you know what you have got to do
to save it. Do it and save my life. I know you do not want to forego
what your people have been granted by the award. I accept your panel
system but you should remove one anomaly from it. You should apply the
panel system to all the seats. You are untouchable by birth and I am by
adoption. We must be one and indivisible. I am prepared to give my life
to avert the break-up of the Hindu community.”

Ambedkar acceded
and agreed to institute instead a reservation of 148 seats for the
depressed classes in the provincial assemblies and also that 10 per cent
of the Hindu seats from British India in the Central Assembly. This
tug-of-war between the two men went on for quite a while, with Gandhi
often threatening fasts unto death when it suited him to bend others to
his will. Finally, in 1933, Ambedkar wrote in the magazine Harijan begun
by Gandhi to highlight the plight of harijans in the country, that so
long as a caste system existed, there will be those who will be at the
bottom, the outcastes. Only with the abolition of the caste system can
untouchability be abolished. Gandhi, however was not prepared for this,
and called for the education of the other castes. Perhaps, Gandhi’s
upbringing as the son of a Diwan to the king of a princely state, where
the caste system was embedded and considered inviolable, had something
to do with his reluctance to eliminate the caste system.

Another
personal tragedy also awaited Ambedkar at this time, when his wife
Ramabai passed away due to ill health on May 27, 1935.

Ambedkar Considers Conversion From Hinduism

Ambedkar
organized and presided over the Depressed Classes Conference at Yeola
on October 30, 1935. It was here that he first mooted the possibility of
converting from Hinduism to another religion. The conference was
attended by 10,000 members of the untouchable community. Ambedkar spoke
for 90 minutes, and recalled how caste Hindus often heaped the worst
atrocities upon them. Since their co-religionists would not allow them a
dignified life in the fold of Hinduism, perhaps it was time to convert
to another religion, where they would be treated with equality and
dignity. “I solemnly assure you that I will not die as a Hindu,” he
stated.

This announcement caused a great furor, with Gandhi
stating that such statements were indeed disappointing. Many Hindu
leaders who were working for abolishing of untouchability, such as Veer
Savarkar, issued a cautionary note and said that even if untouchables
converted to another religion, there was no guarantee that they would
receive equal status. Savarkar pointed out the converted Christians of
Travancore, who were having great conflicts between touchable and
untouchable Christians. Savarakar’s statement is born out even today in
modern day India, where such practices are still underway!

Ambedkar’s
statement was however welcomed by the leaders of other religions, who
saw a great political advantage in bringing this man under their wing.
K.L. Gauba, a Muslim M.L.A. from Punjab sent Ambedkar a telegram
inviting him to join the Islamic faith, where all men were treated as
equals – supposedly. Similar telegrams came from Bishop Badley of
Bombay, representing Christians, the Secretary of the Mahabodhi Society
of Banaras, representing Buddhism, and Sardar Dalip Singh Doabia,
Vice-President of the Golden Temple Managing Committee, representing
Sikhs.

In the midst of all this consternation, on October 30, 1935
the famous Hindu leader, Masurkar Maharaj – who was instrumental in
reconverting about 10,000 Christians to the Hindu fold – appealed to Dr
Ambedkar to reconsider his statements. He stated that such a move would
destroy Hinduism itself and destroy the foundations of Indian society.
Ambedkar agreed with him, but stated that as much as it pained him, he
did not see any other solution. He stated that the way to avert the
impending tragedy lay only in the hands of the upper caste Hindus.
Masurkar agreed with Ambedkar but stated that considering the vast
magnitude of the problem, more time was required to arrive at a feasible
solution. Ambedkar was quick to reply, “Some people think that religion
is not essential to society. I do not hold this view. I consider the
foundation of religion to be essential to the life and practices of a
society. At the root of the Hindu social system lies dharma as
prescribed in the Manusmriti Such being the case, I do not think it is
possible to abolish inequality in Hindu society unless the existing
foundation of the Smriti — religion is removed and a better one laid in
its place. I, however, despair of Hindu society being able to
reconstruct itself on better foundation”.

However, Ambedkar agreed
that if in a period of five years, leaders managed to create a
framework and set up a situation where untouchability was being
abolished, he would reconsider his decisions.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL36ED998BBDF08FAF

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Saheb JI

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Saheb JI

• Mohan Bangar
• 47 videos
• 15,623 views
• Last updated on Mar 24, 2017