Discipline Course-1

Semester-2
Paper: Nationalism in India
Lesson: The Caste Question: Anti-Brahminical Politics
Lesson Developer: Dr. Abdul Rahman Ansari
College/Department: Department of Political Science,
Gargi College, University of Delhi

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

 Table of Contents

The Caste Question: Anti-Brahminical Politics

 Introduction

 Jyotirao Phule 1827-1890

Phule’s Interpretation of History, Mythology and Origin of

Caste

Satyashodhak Samaj: a Vision for Casteless Society

 Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (1891-1956)

Ambedkar: Eradication of Caste System

 Conclusion

 Exercises

 References

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

 THE CASTE QUESTION: ANTI-BRAHMINICAL POLITICS

The social divisions in society in different parts of colonial India were

rooted both in culture and economy. The emergence of early nationalist
feeling among some of the middle to upper class Indians coincided with
the emergence of revolts against the social divisions. Some of the early
social reformers like Jyoitiba Phule and Sri Narayan Guru questioned these
social divisions and became the pioneers of anti-Brahminical politics of
early twentieth century in India. The nature of the movement for social
equality became anti-Brahminical because Brahmins were widely perceived
to be both the founders of these divisions and its main beneficiaries. In
this section we are going to see the development of the movement in
some detail.

„Caste‟ has been present in almost all religious groups in India. However,
except among the Hindus it has no sacred sanction in any other religion.
Though it is difficult to define „caste‟ there is a broader understanding that
it was a systemic hierarchal division of social groups on the basis of purity
and birth (Romila Thaper 1: 62). The original motives of the creation of
the caste system are debatable among historians. Nevertheless, one thing
is clear that it has divided the Hindu society socially into an ever increasing
number of groups and sub-groups. Each of these groups and sub-groups
(Jatis) were exclusive. People were divided on the basis of their profession,
marriage and dining. The Vedas have recorded the existence of the caste
system. According to the Rigaveda and Manusmriti, the Hindu society has
been divided into four Vernas on the basis of their professions namely,
Brahmins, Khatriya, Vaishyas and Shudras. These were not intended to
become exclusive groups on the basis of berth (Jatis). However, birth did

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

become the basis of such divisions historically. It happened due to various
factors including the expansion of Aryan domination geographically, its
interaction with several local racial groups and most importantly increasing
complexity of social and economic lives. This last factor brought into
existence new professions and activities making the traditional divisions
inadequate. Hence, the four original Varnas broke up into various smaller
castes and sub-castes or what we today know Jatis (Romila Thaper 1).

The hierarchy of status of all the castes were carefully arranged. Shudras
were at the bottom of formal structure of four Varnas only above
untouchables who were not even considered to be a part of the Hindu
society. These untouchables were at the lowest rungs of the society and no
interaction with them was allowed as their touch was polluting. The touch
of these untouchables was polluting even for the Shudras (B R Ambedkar
9). The terms Shudras however, in modern times became a common term
for the fourth Varna and untouchables. It was replaced by the colonial
terms „depressed classes‟ first and later on after 1936, by “Schedule
Castes.” Gandhi, rather controversially, preferred to call them „Harijan‟-
meaning God‟s people. Schedule Castes form about 20 per cent of the
Hindu population in the country. The untouchable or Shudras suffered from
numerous and severe treatment by the caste Hindus and were subject of
inhuman restrictions. Brahmins monopolised the priestly occupation which
also gave them an exclusive access to all forms of learning including
religious and secular learning and knowledge. The second and third
positions in the hierarchy of the castes were occupied by Khatriyas
(warriors‟ class) and Vaishyas (business class) (Shekhar Bandyopadhyay
2: 343). People from Shudra and lower categories lived a life of social,
economic and political deprivation due to the above mentioned exclusions.
The untouchables were deprived any access to education and occupational
independence. The rest of the society preyed on their misery. They were
main source of cheap or sometimes slave labour (Romila Thaper 1). The

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

horrors of untouchability in different parts of India have been well
documented in various works of social reformers which we will see below.

The membership to a particular Jatis or castes as occupational groups was

determined by birth, and its exclusiveness had been maintained by
rigorous rules and restrictions. Each and every caste endorsed a ritual
rank, which positioned its members in explained hierarchy that captured
the whole society. It has been very clear that instead of Varnas the
concept of Jatis has become real defining feature of the Caste System in
India. The rigidness and absoluteness of castes has mellowed down
recently due to spread of education and occupational mobility provided by
the modern society. However, it has not been able to completely abandon
the concepts of purity and pollution among the caste hierarchies as
upwardly mobile persons from the so-called lower castes have tried to
imitate the customs, habits and practices of the so called upper castes.
This is what M.N. Srinivas calls as „Sanskritizing‟ tendencies. Nevertheless,
as mentioned above, the spread of education and opening of the
opportunities of upward mobility by the colonial administration in India, led
to the emergence of a small middle class among the socially deprived and
untouchables which created a pan-India anti-Brahmin movement along
with the nationalist movement. This was a movement against humiliation
and for social equality.

Though we cannot say for sure that when exactly the first voices were
raised against the prevalent caste system in colonial India one can be
quite sure that all major social reform movements beginning with the
Brahmo Samaj in Bengal questioned its rationale. However, the struggle
against caste system was never homogeneous. People, from different
parts of India spoke against the system from different angles. For
example, Raja Rammohan Roy the founder of Brahmo Samaj, invoked the
authority old religious works of the Hinduism in order to delegitimize the
caste system. He was of the view that birth based division of caste system

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

in not only inhuman it is also not sanctioned by the religion. According to
him the present form of caste system is a corrupted form of Hinduism and
therefore outdated. The Brahmo Samaj took various campaigns
throughout Bengal to mobilise the opposition to the rigid social divisions
created by the caste system. The appeal against caste system was
wrapped in the urges of the need of newer identities and solidarities.
Keshab Chandra Sen succeeded Raja Rammohan Roy as leaders of the
Samaj. He too was critical of caste divisions. In fact unlike Rammohan Roy
he opposed the relevance of Hindu scriptures itself. By his time caste
divisions were seen simply as hurdles of India‟s rise as a nation.
Nevertheless, none of the early social reformers were definitively able to
question the authority of the texts from which caste and such divisions and
the social evils of untouchability allegedly derived their justifications. It
was only when the second generation of the social reform movement when
the fundamentals of the caste system started getting attacked both in the
traditional bastions of the reform movement and elsewhere.

Keshab Chandra Sen repudiated the caste system without invoking any
scriptural authority. Hence, one can argue that social reforms inaugurated
by Raja Rammohan Roy under the banner of Brahmo Samaj took a radical
step under the leadership of Keshab Chandra Sen. However; there were
other such groups which were active against the evils of caste system by
that time. For example, the Prarthana Samaj in Bombay presidency led
various movements and propaganda campaigns opposing caste. Members
of the Prathana Samaj too were influenced by the West and its democratic
cultural milieu. The caste system was seen as an undemocratic institution
and therefore was thoroughly opposed.

Radical opposition of Indian cultural and social practices by the Prathana

Samaj and the Brahmo Samaj had certain limitations as majority of
Indians were yet not ready to see the virtues of democratic set ups in

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

society based on the western model. By 1870s the racial administrative
policies adopted by the British were also helping in the popularity of anti-
western feelings among some sections of the Indian society. This gave
birth to some reactionary movements (Tanika Sarkar 8). The Arya Samaj
started by Swami Dayananda Saraswati was one such movement. Unlike
the previously mentioned movements it propagated the preservation of the
caste system. The argument put forward by it was that the revival of Vedic
teachings will create genuine democratic space in India. This
understanding was based on the belief that Indian culture was pure and
most developed. In history, due to „external influences‟ the great Hindu
civilisation was corrupted. The western influence was seen as the latest
incursion on Hinduism. The followers of the Arya Samaj believed that the
division of the Hindu society into numerous sub-castes and practices of
untouchability were alien to it. They, instead, would have liked to restore
the original four fold division giving full rights to social mobility to all
castes including Shudras. Thus, one can see that the early anti-caste
movements were primarily divided among two one which wanted to do
away with it (Brahmo Samaj and the Prarthana Samaj) and the other
which wanted to reform it (the Arya Samaj).

In the early twentieth century the movement against caste became more
complex and varied. At one end were organisations like All India Harijan
Sangh (AIHS) which was founded by Gandhi and another was Sri Narayan
Guru‟s movement in South India particularly in Kerala. AISH was also a
Hindu reform movement. It tried to restore the beliefs in original Hindu
scriptures. It functioned on the belief that through education, propaganda,
and practical measures equal social, religious and cultural rights of the
untouchables can be restored. Gandhi‟s focus on untouchability eradication
was, however, motivated by a strong urge to maintain the Varna system in
its original form. Gandhi insisted that caste system is necessary and it
does not deprive anyone from achieving his/her aims of life. His defence of

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

caste system was criticised by many including the newly emerging
leadership from the so called lower castes itself.

The fight against caste system took its anti-Brahmin from only by the late
nineteenth century simultaneously in Maharashtra and Tamilnadu or
Madras. According to Sumit Sarkar, “first signs of political movement
among so called „low caste‟ people began after the first round of census in
India in 1871.” According to him “it first started in south India where some
of Shudras started movements for social recognition and dignity.” He gives
the examples of Tamilnadu where newly emergent mercantile class of
among lower ranked Shanans and Pallis castes “claimed Khatriyas status”
some of them began calling themselves as Nadar which was a term so far
confined to “the owners of land and Palmyra trees” (Sumit Sarkar 3: 55).
What was different in these movements from the earlier social reform
movements is the class and sections which led it were from the lower
castes and classes. That explains their unwillingness to share the urge to
„reform‟ the Hindu system. Instead they all fought for eradication of the
caste system which they saw as a form of domination of Brahmins. Their
assertion was not taken well by the so called upper castes. The tension
between the caste groups led to different riots between upper and lower
castes. E Ramaswamy Naikar Periyar‟s led Vaikom Satygraha demanded
temple entry to all untouchables in 1924. Periyar later led the Justice Party
in Tamilnadu which was struggling against the Brahmin dominance in
government jobs and education sectors. The „self respect movement‟
launched and led by Periyar and his followers was a movement of
backward castes for equality in social, economic and cultural spheres
questioning any form of hierarchy and religious privileges (Bipin Chandra
8).

In 1920 this anti-Brahmin movement in Tamilnadu under the leadership of

Periyar and others took a popular form. Though it was basically a revolt of

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

middle classes against the dominance of Brahmins it was joined in large
numbers by Shudras as well. The Mahars of Maharashtra, later the
backbone of Ambedkar‟s movement, were beginning to organise
themselves under Gopal Baba Walangkar, by the end of the nineteenth
century. The nature of Walangkars movement was not anti-Brahmin
though. He was more worried about getting recognition as Khatriyas for
his followers and more jobs in the army and services for this untouchable
caste. Most of the Mahars were professionally involved in services like
watchmen, local arbitrators, messengers, sweepers, etc which were
considered to be inferior (Sumit Sarkar 3: 55). The coming of British had
already opened the opportunity for Mahars to get better jobs in the army.
However, “the new emphasis on north Indian „martial races‟ in army
recruitment provided the immediate provocation for the beginning of
Mahar organisation” (Sumit Sarkar 3: 55).

On the whole, however, the more effective caste movements in that period
tended to be connected with intermediate ranks, below the twice-born and
above the untouchables, and usually included considerable landed or rich
peasant elements with the capacity to produce urban educated groups. In
Bombay presidency (today‟s Maharashtra) too there was clear Brahmin
domination over common cultural life and all kinds of services and
economic life. With rise of educated sections among the middle classes by
the end of the 18th century there was emerging a great anti-Brahmin
movement. Its first foundation was led in the 1870s by Jyotirao Phule. His
book, Ghulamgiri (l872) and his organisation, the Satyashodhak Samaj
(1873), “proclaimed the need to save the „lower castes from the
hypocritical Brahmins and their opportunistic scriptures” (Braj Ranjan Mani
4: 250). Phule was one of the first urban-educated members of the „lowly‟
Mali (gardening) caste. The movement which he started later attracted
some other peasant castes such as Marathas.

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The spread of education among the depressed castes gradually, in the
early twentieth century, brought forth a group of intellectual such as Dr.
Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (1891-1956). Ambedkar, through his fierce
criticisms of the Hindu caste system was able to represent the sufferings of
the lower castes in India. He realised and represented the disabilities
caused by the caste discrimination and passionately fought for the human
rights equality and dignity of his community. In order to fight for these
rights he founded the All India Depressed Federation and All India
Depressed Classes Association and led them.

The rigid caste system, hierarchical graded and based on birth, was the
principal target of umbrella of the socio-reform movements in which anti-
Brahmin (extreme form of non-Brahmin movements) takes the
revolutionary shape under the leadership of the Jyotirao Phule (1827-
1890) and Ambedkar. Though Gandhi too tried to mitigate the evils of
caste system in India through his anti-untouchability movement his own
beliefs in the virtues of Varna system somehow discredited his intentions.
The so called lower castes looked forward to their own leaders and
sometime took extreme steps to eradicate the class which they thought
was responsible for their sufferings. Below we are going to see two main
figures of Anti-Brahmin movement in colonial India in some detail without
undermining the contributions of others such as Sri Narayan Guru, Savitiri
Bai Phule and others.

JOTIRAO PHULE 1827-1890

Phule was born in 1827 in a so called lower caste Mali family which were
predominantly fruit and vegetable growers in Maharashtra. He got his
primary education in Marathi-medium school during 1834. Later on he also
went for English medium education during 1841-7. After his graduation he
realised the need for education for all and for women of his caste in
particular and breaking the existing norms he established a school for girl‟s

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

child of the poor section of society in 1848. He established more schools
between 1848 and 1852 in which girls from all section of society were
admitted. In addition, he opened night school for the working people in
1955. He became part of the movement of widow remarriage in the 1860s.
He set another milestone while opening home for illegitimate children and
their mothers in 1863 and also opened the water tank for untouchables in
the same year. On the other hand he wrote Ghulamgiri (slavery) 1873,
and founded Satyashodhak Samaj (society of the seekers of truth) in the
same year. He also became the member of Pune Municipal Council in
1876-82. He deposed before the Hunter Commission for Education on 19
October 1882 which was formed by the British administration to suggest
reforms in the education system in India. On 11 May 1888 he was
honoured with the title of “Mahatma” in the massive public gathering.
Finally, after prolonged illness he died on 28 November 1890 (Braj Ranjan
Mani 4).

As far as the prevailing social environment is concerned it was not in

favour of Phule. He was a child of the oppression of his socio-historical
environment. He had to face indignities and humiliations because his birth
was in lower caste Shudra (untouchable) family. Brahmins in then Bombay
province as in any other part of India considered themselves as the chosen
caste. Acceptance of the „divinely- ordained‟ superiority of the Brahmins
was still the norm and custom. All the important positions were kept for
Brahmin in the Peshwa administration. Chitpavans Brahmins were the
dominant force in the society in every aspects such as in economic,
administration, cultural functions and so on. Phule‟s movement questioned
all such claims of superiority and dominance. He through his writings and
through his acts was able to create a sense of confidence among the so
called lower communities of Bombay province and gradually became a
symbol of anti-Brahmin movement.

Phule’s Interpretation of History, Mythology and Origin of Caste

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

In the above mentioned configuration of society and existing environments
the main challenge for Phule was to transform and reorder it according to
his own vision. The strongest challenge for him was to counter or give an
alternative interpretation to the Brahminism. It was not easy task for him
because the foundation of Brahminism was set in the ancient scriptures
and religious literature. Therefore, he begins with different interpretations.
He argued that there is nothing sacred or religious about Brahminism. It is
urgent need to examine the basic foundation of this domination. The
domination of Brahminism was established because the masses were
ignorant. The centuries practiced culture, customs and traditions made
these masses mentally bondage. In this regard Dharma Shastras and
Itihas-Purana was the major sources. By observing these strong social
structure, and in order to counter it Phule came up with the deferent
interpretations of Brahmin histories, scriptures, myths and stories. He
attempted to interconnect the past history with the present. His intention
behind the rewriting history was to bring all suppressed and divided people
together in order to fight with common adversaries (Braj Mani Ranjan 4).

For this purpose, Phule took out several prose and poetic works which had
broad idea regarding the history of toiling castes in the public life. The
main instruments for countering the prevailing cultural hegemony were
tracts, magazines, plays and leaflets. These all were to expose how one
particular caste was able to establish monopoly over education and power.
Brilliantly, he projected the history of ancient India as the continuous
battle between Brahmins and Shudra-atishudras. He gave a theoretical
and analytical understanding of origin and growth of caste system in an
historical and materialist perspective. This interpretation was entirely new
of its kind. Phule saw Brahminism and the caste order as historical
construction in order to pursue hegemonic structure and exploitation which
must be fought and dismantled.

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

Phule came out with the revolutionary tracts against the Brahminism and
rejected its philosophical foundation. His idea was to break the entire
structure of exploitative system. He strongly rejected the doctrine of
karma. According to this doctrine suffering of present days is the result of
previous births of any person. He was of the view that Brahmin had
enslaved the innocent people on the notion of daiva (fate), sanchit
(accumulated merits/ demerits of previous births), and prarabdha
(predestination). These notions were responsible for them to make
ignorant about the dialectical relationship with the world which finally
compelled them to surrender to the dominant social forces. He also
rejected the theory of incarnation. According to incarnation theory, Vishnu
incarnated different times in different forms in order to save the society
from anarchy and establish peace. The theory of incarnation regarded as
the heart of Brahminic religious system because it resolves the
contradiction between polytheistic religious practices and monotheistic
Vedantist metaphysics. According to Phule, the various incarnations of
Vishnu was responsible for the Aryan onslaught which was the indigenous
people. Hence, Phule attempted to uproot the basic foundation on which
Brahminism was sustained while rejecting the two core doctrines of Karma
and incarnation (G P Despande 5).

Phule‟s Gulamgiri was one of the attempts in this regard. By Gulamgiri

Phule rejected the Brahminic caste ideology and accepted the Dravidian
theory. His idea was to encounter the Aryan mythology. He gave the idea
of Bali-rajya which was based on equality and justice while rejecting Ram-
rajya which was based on the Varna-dharma. While countering Brahminical
historiography he interpreted the Vedic Aryan as the original coloniser of
the original inhabitants. He argued that the upper strata of Indian society
were ancestry of the savage aliens. These aliens enslaved the peace loving
original inhabitants and captured their belongings. In addition, he argued
that the violent invaders imposed inhuman social and religious practices on

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

original inhabitants in order to keep them under continuous subjugation.
Caste system, according to Phule, was an instrument through which
Brahmins strengthened its position in the society (G P Despande 5).

According to him Shivaji was a rebellion against the caste tyranny of

Brahmin whose ancestors were robbed of their power by the treacherous
Brahmin Peshwas. While repudiating the Tilak‟s resurrection of Shivaji in
the 1890s, Phule kept Shivaji within the anti-Brahminical tradition of
Maharashtrian history and culture. Moreover, by interpreting the word
kshetra as field or land he explained that Kashtriyas was the original
inhabitants who were destroyed by the invasion Aryan and put under the
subhuman condition from then onwards. Further he argued that those who
were worked in the field were Kashtriyas. In addition, while putting Shivaji
within the lower caste, he made him (Shivaji) as the hero of all
Shudraatishudras (G P Despande 5).

Satyashodhak Samaj: A Vision for Casteless Society

Experiencing the whole sort of oppressions and exploitations by the

hegemonic Brahminic organisations Phule wanted to create a casteless
society based on the modern values of rationality and justice. The idea of
Satyashodhak Samaj, was an attempt in that direction. The equality of all
human beings was one of the main principles of the Samaj. All the
members were advised to move among the people and spread truth and
right-thinking. Increasing awareness about the man‟s natural rights and
social obligations was duties of its members. All kinds of social evils and
malpractices were to be targeted. Public education was given more
importance. Women and children were taught by the members.
Membership was not confined to any particular caste or communities but it
was kept open for all section of society including Brahmins, Mangs and
Mahars. In its starting even some of the members were Jews and Muslims
(Braj Ranjan Mani 4).

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

Moreover, Samaj rejected any kinds of ritual performance by the Brahmins
to other caste because it would validate the purity of Brahmins. In
addition, it would mean that the only Brahmin priest have control in the
respect of entry of divine. While keeping all theses religious practices in
mind Phule advised his followers in the Samaj to organise and conduct
religious and marriage ceremonies in people‟s language without Brahmin
priests and their „mumbo jumbo‟ in Sanskrit‟. In reaction to this the radical
Brahmins started campaign to counter Samaj in the form of propaganda.
How would your prayers reach God if they were said in Marathi and not
Sanskrit, they asked the innocent people? Phule had to pacify his
supporters that God knew everything and understood the yearnings and
prayers of every human soul; however expressed. The orthodox Brahmins
attempted to threaten the people by arguing that their association with the
Samaj would have disastrous impact on their family. Consequently, several
Satyashodhaks had to bear the brunt of Brahminic wrath. Those who were
the members of Samaj were harassed, and some of them were forced to
leave government jobs on the various grounds by their superior officers,
mostly Brahmins. However, all these activities were unable to break the
strong will of the most Satyashodhaks (Braj Ranjan Mani 4).

According to G P Despande, “Phule was first thinker who interpreted the

Indian Society on the basis of class. He was very clear in his idea that
wealth of the society was produced by Shudra-atishudras as they had to
suffer oppression at the hands of the elite, the bloodsucking consumers of
society‟s resources. He tried to unite all labouring classes - Kunbis, Malis,
Dhangars, Muslims, Bhils, Kolis, Mahars and Mangs -under one umbrella”
(5). The idea was to start struggle against the Brahminical falsehood on
the basis of morality and knowledge. He wanted to bring together
peasants, untouchables, Muslim masses without which the common
adversaries could not be fought. According to O‟Hanlon (as quoted in G P

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

Despande 5) one of the aims of his play, Tritiya Ratna (1855), was to
induce his audience that the heterogeneous collections of social groups
which was the part of exploited did, had, common interests and a common
social position, “This was to be done by the ideological construction of a
social grouping that would be both socially credible and attractive. The
latter was particularly important, so that elite non-Brahmin castes might
not feel that they were losing by their association with traditionally low
castes. This new social construct was to be the community of the
oppressed itself, with its explanation of social evils in terms of the
exploitation of all try one group, and its atmosphere of hope and striving
for change.”

DR. BHIMRAO RAMJI AMBEDKAR (1891-1956)

Ambedkar‟s is one of the most influential leaders of modern India. He is

popular and respected not only among the Dalits but across all the
progressive sections. He was born on 14 April, 1891. His family belonged
to the so called lower caste community of Mahar in Bomaby presidency
which is in present day Maharashtra. The Mahars were treated as
untouchables. This particular social background created various hurdles in
Ambedkar‟s education. He was often discriminated in the class rooms and
offices he worked. Nevertheless, he was a bright and hardworking student
which helped him get a scholarship from the ruler of Baroda Sayajirao
Gaekwad. With this scholarship Ambedkar attended Columbia University
and completed his PhD. Few years later he went on completing his another
doctorate from the London School of Economics and became a barrister.

His long stays in Europe and United States and his lengthy studies made
him a strong believer in western idea of social equality. When he returned
from England he gradually participated in the movements against the caste
system. His commitment for the upliftment of the Dalits was soon
recognised by the others and they accepted him as their supreme leader
eventually. Ambedkar led various movements defying the prevalent caste

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

norms such as temple entry and drawing of waters from the village wells
and ponds. As we all know that untouchables were not allowed by the
upper castes to either enter the village temple or to draw water from
common well. He also formed and led various organisations such as the
Bahishkrit Hitkarni Sabha, Independent Labour Party and later All India
Scheduled Caste Federation in order to organise untouchables and mobilise
them to fight for their equal rights. He realised the importance of
education in creating awareness about the rights of the people. Hence, he
helped in the establishment of several educational institutions. He used
popular means of propaganda to disseminate his views on caste and other
such issues. He edited newspapers like the Janata, ‘Mooknayak’ and
Bahishkrit Bharat’. Through his articles and speeches he always attacked
the Brahminical social and cultural institutions and questioned the blind
adherence to all these ideas. He wanted to create a casteless society and
was a believer in the idea of annihilation of caste.

In 1930-32 Ambedkar participated in the Round Table Conferences held

was British to devise a new system of government despite the boycott call
given by the Congress. His step was an attempt to give untouchables
representation in the policy making of the country at the same time
opposing the British rule in India. He played a very significant role in the
framing of Indian constitution as the Chairman of the Drafting Committee
of the Constituent Assembly. Ambedkar became India‟s first Law Minister.
Though he was never satisfied with the Hindu religion and has been
contemplating to change the religion for long it was only in 1956, few year
before his death that he finally choose to do that. He adopted Buddhism in
front of a huge gathering of his supporters and appealed to his followers to
do the same. He was convinced that reforming Hindu religion was
impossible and untouchables will never be treated equally if they remain
Hindu. Buddhism was considered to the only religion which has remained
uninfluenced from the problems of Caste system. His debate with Gandhi
on the caste system in the context of the Pune Pact 1932 was crucial for
the development of this understanding. Gandhi‟s defence of Varna System

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

as an essential part of Hindusim was seen by Ambedkar as the sign of
hopelessness.

Ambedkar was a great social thinker and scholar apart from being a great
activist. He produced seminal writings on wide ranging social and political
issues. Some of most celebrated works are ‘Annihilation of Castes’ (1936),
„Who Were the Shudras’ (1946), ‘The Untouchables (1948)’, ‘Buddha and
His Dharma (1957).‟ Apart from his deep faith in the ideas of equity and
liberty Ambedkar was also deeply influenced by the liberal philosophy of
John Dewey. As we make out from his writings Jyotirao Phule and Buddha
too have impressed Ambedkar‟s deeply. In a nutshell “his personal
experiences as an untouchable, his scholarship and his continuous
attention to the problem of bringing about equality for the downtrodden
untouchable community form the basis of his thinking and writings” (Braj
Ranjan Mani 4).

Ambedkar: Eradication of Caste System

From 1924 till the end of his life Ambedkar led various struggles against
the untouchability. He had clear understanding that the progress and
independence of the people could be achieved only through removing
untouchability from the society and by breaking its inherent link with the
caste system. According to him caste system could only be discarded by
“de-legitimising its religious basis” (B R Ambedkar 6). In order to do that
he studied Hindu religious scriptures and philosophies based on them and
found various reasons to criticise it. He argued that Varna System was
devised initially as a division of labour which later became as a permanent
division of labour on birth benefitting the Brahmins. The ideas of purity
and pollution was introduced to maintain this division and hence an amoral
and inhuman practice. He appealed people to not to follow these ideas and
asked them to have more and more inter-religious marriages so that the
divisions on the basis of birth become irrelevant.

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

Ambedkar visualised the achievement of the goal of social justice as the
first and foremost. Independence from foreign rule, for Ambedkar, will
only mean transferring power to the upper caste Hindus. These upper
caste Hindus will maintain social discrimination depriving majority of the
population from real freedom. Since these upper caste Hindus are equally
distant from the people the real freedom will not come until there is a
commitment for the removal of social injustice and discrimination. It was
this belief that led Ambedkar to demand reservation for lower castes in the
legislative assemblies before the 1935 Government of India Act. He also
believed in the futility of the idea that economic progress will resolve social
problems. Caste, he believed survives on making people mental slaves.
Caste system has created stagnation in Indian society while preventing
majority of its population from acquiring education and skills and making
them slaves of traditions. The caste system has prevented India from
becoming one homogeneous community of nations as it has refused to
accept untouchables as citizens of India. One cannot expect the lower
castes to feel the love for society and nation if they face discrimination and
humiliation by some members of the society. It is very natural for them to
feel alienated from the fights of national freedom. Hence, it is not possible
to bring any real change and unity in India “without doing away with the
evil of casteism.” It was argued was by Ambedkar that without first
bringing the social reforms there cannot be any real change in society.
According to him social reform primarily consists of reforming the family
system and religion. He was very critical of the practices of not letting
widows marrying again and the practices of child-marriage etc. He
considered the oppression of women equal to the oppression of lower
castes. He supported the upliftment of women also while reforming
marriage and divorce laws.

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

Ambedkar argued that because if the inabilities of the upper caste Hindus
to accommodate the lower caste people and treat them with dignity that
the latter finds British as their liberators. British, in order to rule over
Indians used the divisions in society created by the upper caste and gave
the lower caste opportunity to gain and feel dignified through secular laws
and treatments. According to Ambedkar the demands for neutrality of the
British government in India in social and religious matters was reactionary
demand. The neutrality of the British means perpetuating the reactionary
and oppressive social customs and institutions by the upper castes.
Ambedkar, therefore, argued for strong intervention by the British in the
social, political and economic life of Indians so that an objective social
system based on equality before the law and liberty of individuals emerges
(G S Lokhande 7).

Ambedkar believed that freedom of untouchables would automatically

emancipate the Hindu society as a whole. According to him caste is
worthless institution and nothing substantial can be created on its basis.
Therefore a casteless society is a must. Inter-caste marriages, education
and ruthless liberal laws can help bring this casteless society. He was not
cosmetic changes like inter caste dinning as it helps in bringing no
substantial change. Instead he supported liberating people from orthodox
religious scriptures and traditions. However, Ambedkar knew that all this
involve a total change in Hinduism which would take a very long time.
Since society will not willingly accept these changes therefore we need to
have strong laws to curb and discourage all kinds of reactionary upsurges.
He believed in affirmative actions and reservations as a tool to bring that
required change in society for this simple reason.

Ambedkar emphasised on education and urbanisation as two important

tools of breaking caste hierarchies. He appealed to his followers not to
learn traditional skills and instead to pursue modern education. He

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

believed in education because it makes man enlightened and makes him
aware of his self-respect along with making him better able to live life
materially. He urged his followers to get away from village community and
it is the locale which deprives them from the knowledge of outside world
and prevents them from social and economic mobility. Ambedkar
proclaims that villages are “a sink of localism, a den of ignorance, narrow-
mindedness and communalism” (B R Ambedkar 6).

CONCLUSION

To conclude, the caste question in India played a very significant role in

changing the nature of Indian national movement. It democratised the
political awareness and brought a large number of people in the
mainstream. People such as Phule and Ambedkar played a very crucial role
in this process of democratisation of Indian national awakening. Their
struggles laid the foundation of social justice in India. Phule and early
critiques of caste system recognised the role of upper castes particularly
Brahmins in the subjugation of other castes whereas Ambedkar was a
staunch critique of Hindu caste system and was a great support of modern
society based on equality, liberty and dignity of individuals. His greatest
contribution was his idea of social justice and his showing the path for
Indian people that through education and organisation one can fight and
change anything.

EXERCISES

1. What was the nature of early caste movements in India? Elaborate

with examples.

2. How do you define the role of Phule in the rise of nationalism in

India?

3. Asses the role of Ambedkar in the Indian national movement.

4. What was Ambedkar‟s idea of eradication of caste?

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

 5. Can we compare Ambedkar and Phule roles in the anti-Brahmin
politics? Justify your answer.

REFERENCES

1. Romila Thaper (2002), The Penguin History of Early India, New Delhi:
Penguin Books

2. Sekhar Bandyopadhyay (2009), From Plassey to Partition: A History of

Modern India, Hyderabad: Orient BlackSwan

3. Sumit Sarkar (1983), Modern India: 1885-1947, New Delhi: Macmillan

4. Braj Ranjan Mani (2005) Debrahmanising History: Dominance and

Resistance in Indian Society, Delhi: Manohar Publications

5. G. P. Deshpande (2008), Selected Writing of Jotirao Phule, Delhi: Left

Word Publications

6. Ambedkar, B. R. (1946), Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and

Speeches (BAWS), Vol. 1-15, Vasant Moon (ed), Bombay: The Education
Department, Govt. of Maharashtra

7. G.S. Lokhande (1977), Bhim Rao Ramji Ambedkar – A Study in Social

Democracy, New Delhi: Sterling Publication.

8. Bipan Chandra et al (2000), India’s Struggle for Independence, New

Delhi: Penguin Books

9. B. R. Ambedkar (2002), The Essential Writings of B R Ambedkar,

Valerian Rodrigues (ed), New Delhi: Oxford University Press

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi