In 1980, the federal government of Indira Gandhi determined to bestow the Bharat Ratna on Mother Teresa for her contributions to India. About ten years after that, when the Congress misplaced energy briefly, the Janata Dal authorities determined to acknowledge a sure social reformer from Maharashtra who had been lifeless for 34 years. His identify was Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar. You could have heard of him.
In trendy India, his likeness is in all places. Blue coat, round-frame glasses, with one hand raised within the air, whereas holding the structure with the opposite. But, allow us to dig deeper. Here is how he noticed himself in relation to Hinduism.
“Though, I was born a Hindu, I solemnly assure you that I will not die as a Hindu”
Wow, that’s harsh. And right here he’s, evaluating Hinduism to the beliefs of the enlightenment as captured within the slogan of the French Revolution.
“Hinduism is a menace to liberty, equality and fraternity.“
Again, ouch. But, you don’t assume that somebody of Dr. Ambedkar’s caliber would restrict his musings solely to Hinduism, would you? So allow us to discover out what he needed to say concerning the idea of brotherhood in Islam.
“The brotherhood of Islam is just not the common brotherhood of man. It is brotherhood of Muslims for Muslims solely. There is a fraternity, however its profit is confined to these inside that company.“
And right here he’s, talking on how a would possibly Muslim would possibly see his place in India.
“the allegiance of a Muslim does not rest on his domicile in the country which is his but on the faith to which he belongs. …. In other words, Islam can never allow a true Muslim to adopt India as his motherland and regard a Hindu as his kith and kin.”
We have already discovered one thing necessary about Dr. Ambedkar. He didn’t consider in appeasing anybody. Even greater than that, he didn’t sugarcoat his phrases.
Now, the primary set of his quotes, on Hinduism, are what you’d discover in any discourse on social “science” in India. These can be required studying earlier than class, the subject of debate throughout the lecture and in addition the topic of the homework project. However, the second set of his quotes, on Islam, aren’t so simply accessible. You can solely discover them in darkish corners of the web, banished from textbooks, classroom discussions, acknowledged solely in embarrassed whispers. These quotes had all however vanished from tutorial discourse earlier than the “internet Hindus” introduced them again to life. Sometimes, a little bit of Whatsapp training can actually unravel stuff they don’t train you in common courses.
In reality, there’s a significantly craven piece of writing by Anand Teltumbde in Scroll the place he argues that Ambedkar thought-about Islam as the faith of selection for Dalits earlier than he determined in opposition to it. The following extract from his article is each unhappy and humorous.
“he appeared to be extolling Islam and thereby gave an impression that Islam might be his choice for conversion, he ended his speech with the famous exhortation of the Buddha in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta – “Appo deepo bhava” (Be your individual mild). It was not stunning that he in the end selected Buddhism, ignoring his personal rationale that the non secular conversion of Dalits ought to serve their want of existential utility.”
I can perceive the writer’s bitter disappointment right here, in addition to his emotional outburst. But don’t you assume it’s a bit a lot to accuse Dr. Ambedkar of “ignoring his own rationale”? In reality, Ambedkar defined his causes for selecting Buddhism over some other faith, in these phrases:
“I will choose only the least harmful way for the country. And that is the greatest benefit I am conferring on the country by embracing Buddhism; for Buddhism is a part and parcel of Bharatiya culture. I have taken care that my conversion will not harm the tradition of the culture and history of this land.”
Sharp and clear. Dear Anand Teltumbde, you could now cry a river.
Anyway, that was simply an instance of how trendy liberal intellectuals drive themselves to assume. Let us deal with the larger query. What would Dr. Ambedkar say about Hindu society and about Muslim society immediately?
Dr. Ambedkar spoke of the annihilation of caste. He wrote a e-book about it. Have we, in trendy India, managed to annihilate caste? No, we have now not. Have we Hindus managed to mitigate a few of the worst atrocities of the caste system and brought a number of steps in the direction of a extra simply society? Undoubtedly, sure. The system of caste primarily based reservation in authorities jobs, faculty admissions and in elections in India is probably the most complete social justice program carried out wherever on the planet. And the actual churning in Hindu society is way larger than what has been enforced by regulation.
There is not any higher approach to see this evolution than within the politics. Few individuals immediately would notice that the “Pandit” in “Pandit Nehru” had nothing to do with a notion of him being a discovered particular person. Rather, it was a caste honorific generally utilized to Brahmins on the time. Those days are clearly behind us. Even although the Congress social gathering has careworn Rahul Gandhi’s “janeudhari” standing, I feel any try and label him as “Pandit Rahul Gandhi” can be universally mocked.
Put your finger on 1947 and hint the political historical past of India since then. The political emancipation of Dalits doesn’t start till the late Nineteen Eighties. Until then, we have now an India consolidated underneath the hereditary Brahmin management of the Congress. This management is trendy in speech and feudal in spirit, passing seamlessly from father to daughter to son. Then, the material begins to tear and two distinct strands emerge. One is Mandal, which treats social justice situation as the principle situation of id. The different is Hindutva, the so referred to as ‘Kamandal,’ whose priorities lie with constructing a united Hindu voting bloc.
In the stale air of social science lecture rooms, these two forces are nonetheless at warfare immediately. Outside, the warfare has ended way back. India now has an OBC Prime Minister, who occurs to symbolize specifically the traditional metropolis of Varanasi. Across India, caste primarily based events are both dropping relevance or reinventing themselves round different points. The downfall of the BSP is the largest instance of this phenomenon. The Mandal events, as an alternative of opposing the Mandir, have all made peace with it. They know which method individuals are going. Even the cheerleaders of the RJD in latest Bihar elections famous the absence of caste within the election. Tejashwi Yadav didn’t even point out it himself. When caste stops being a difficulty in Bihar, what’s left?
Indeed, the BJP, as soon as labeled an higher caste social gathering, now challenges Indian liberalism within the latter’s fortress of Bengal. The mainstay of the BJP is just not the higher caste vote, however Dalits and tribals throughout the state. The politics displays the change in fundamentals of Hindu society. Do you assume Dr. Ambedkar wouldn’t have seen this if he had been round immediately?
Of course, it isn’t simply Hindu society that may evolve. The Muslim society can evolve as effectively. But, has it?
At the time when the Hindu code invoice was launched, it confronted opposition from conservative parts. But the actual fact is that the invoice did move and was carried out. Over the years, Hindu private regulation has been modernized additional and additional. With attainable exception of some obscure provisions, we have now now achieved a regulation that treats everybody equally. This wouldn’t have been attainable with out change in Hindu society itself.
Did Muslim private regulation sustain? Not in any respect. Even immediately, a Muslim girl’s inheritance is simply half that of a person. Muslim ladies have just about no rights on divorce. Their minimal age for marriage remains to be not mounted by regulation and Muslim women as younger as 13 or 14 will be legally married. In reality, till the anti-Triple Talaq Bill was handed in 2019, I ponder if there’s a single instance of Muslim private regulation being modernized since 1947. And when the primary reform was handed in 2019, it was accomplished by the BJP, which will get a really tiny fraction of Muslim votes. So, the place is the impetus inside Muslim society for progressive change?
Indeed, Dr. Ambedkar acknowledged this distinction himself when he wrote thus:
“The existence of these evils among the Muslims is distressing enough. But far more distressing is the fact that there is no organized movement of social reform among the Musalmans of India on a scale sufficient to bring about their eradication. The Hindus have their social evils. But there is this relieving feature about them—namely, that some of them are conscious of their existence and a few of them are actively agitating for their removal. The Muslims, on the other hand, do not realize that they are evils and consequently do not agitate for their removal. Indeed, they oppose any change in their existing practices.”
When Dr. Ambedkar wrote these strains, a “few” Hindus had been agitating for social reform. They confronted opposition, however in the end individuals listened to their concepts. The values of the few turned these of the numerous and in the end, common values. Even comparatively innocuous cultural practices akin to sindoor or kanyadaan are actually being severely challenged in up to date society, on grounds that they might be primarily based in regressive thought. Is there an analogous problem to the concept behind the burqa? Instead, we have now utter give up, the place the allegedly enlightened are attempting to say the burqa because the epitome of feminism.
And what concerning the prejudices prevalent in Muslim society in opposition to non-Muslims, particularly those that worship idols? Dr. Ambedkar had additionally referred to this, keep in mind?
“The realist must take note of the fact that the Musalmans look upon the Hindus as Kaffirs, who deserves more to be exterminated than protected. The realist must take note of the fact that while the Musalman accepts the European as his superior, he looks upon the Hindu as his inferior.”
How far have we are available eliminating this prejudice? Well, final time I checked, Indian liberals had been utilizing destruction of idols as a metaphor for preventing evil and singing “Bas naam rahega … ka.” Suffice to say, due to this fact, that we have now not come very far.
What do you assume Dr. Ambedkar would say immediately concerning the relative efficiency of Hindu and Muslim society within the years since 1947? Can you be as frank and clear in stating your ideas as he was? Close your eyes, image your self placing your hand on the Constitution after which communicate. No imprecise justifications. No excuses. Tell me the reality.