American Journal of Social Sciences
2014; 2(1): 7-15
Published online February 28, 2014 (http://www.openscienceonline.com/journal/ajss)
B. R. Ambedkar’s idea on equality and freedom:
An Indian perspective
Ishita Aditya
Bejoy Narayan Mahavidyalaya, Dept. of Political Science, University of Burdwan, India
Email address
[email protected]
To cite this article
Ishita Aditya. B. R. Ambedkar’s Idea on Equality and Freedom: An Indian Perspective. American Journal of Social Sciences.
Vol. 2, No. 1, 2014, pp. 7-15.
Abstract
B.R.Ambedkar, the chief architect of Indian Constitution, came at the appropriate moment in British ruled India to
assume the natural leadership of his kinsmen and participated in social movement and got involved in founding the
constitutional edifice of the country. The present study is an attempt to make an objective analysis of the strand of the
ideas of Ambedkar on equality and freedom in Indian context while keeping in minds the gaps and lapses in the existing
literature on Ambedkar. Indians, especially, downtrodden people of India consider him as immortal soul whose memory
will even guide the nation on the path of social justice, liberty and equality. It can be said that Ambedkarism is of great
relevance to Indian society even today in achieving social justice, removal of untouchability, in establishing equality and
freedom and true democracy.
Keywords
B. R. Ambedkar, India, Equality, Freedom, Caste
1. Introduction
Born in a socially backward caste, educated along the
lines the western system, rational in outlook and somewhat
rebellious in mentality and temperament, Ambedkar came
at the appropriate moment in British ruled India to assume
the natural leadership of his kinsmen and participated in
social movement and got involved in founding the
constitutional edifice of the country. As regards the
emancipation of the backward classes, first he criticized the
caste Hindus for their social apathy towards the depressed
classes, blamed the British for their political and economic
backwardness and stood as the unrivalled champion of the
depressed classes, and dedicated his life to the cause of
their amelioration.
The present study is an attempt to make an objective
analysis of the strands of the ideas of Ambedkar on equality
and freedom while keeping in minds the gaps and lapses in
the existing literature on Ambedkar.
2. Brief Overview of Literature on
Different Aspects of B. R.
Ambedkar’s Thought
Quite a large number of works are there which have dealt
with the different aspects of Ambedkar’s socio-political
views. Of them, the following are worth -mentioning.
Dhananjay Keer’s Dr Ambedkar: Life and Mission
(1971), though mainly a running commentary on
Ambedkar’s personal and political life, deals passim with
his social and political ideas. This book is a study of the
development of personality of this great man in which the
author has endeavoured to cast a fascinating light on
Ambedkar’s words and deeds and the sources from which
they sprang. Based on exhaustive research, this biography
describes how Ambedkar raised himself from a lowest rung
of society to an enviable position of a nation-builder in
Indian political universe by his incredible diligence and
noble self-denial. The book gives an illuminating account
of Ambedkar’s search for knowledge, his heroic struggle
8
Ishita Aditya: B. R. Ambedkar’s Idea on Equality and Freedom: An Indian Perspective
for the liberation of an oppressed people in bondage, his
point of differences with Mahatma Gandhi and other
eminent Indian leaders and his contempt for Hinduism.
Side by side, the book also gives an idea of Ambedkar’s
contribution to Indian thought, his perception of history and
literature and the role he played in the making of Indian
Constitution. Ambedkar’s interpretation of Hinduism from
a dalit point of view and his proslytization to Buddhism in
the last years of his life is also fully described. Besides,
Keer’s study provides a most inspiring case study of what a
man could achieve by his indomitable perseverance and
great self-denial, even under the most depressing and
destitute circumstances.
In his book entitled Dr Ambedkar: A Critical Study
(1975), W. N. Kuber focuses on a wide spectrum of
Ambedkar’s views on different social and political
questions examined from Marxian standpoint. This
unconventional work analyzes the conditions of scheduled
castes in Indian society and politics. It also deals with their
role in the freedom movement and the attitude of the
British rulers towards them, and seeks to review the social
reform movement as also the legislative measures adopted
to redress their grievances during Ambedkar’s time. The
study also deals with Ambedkar’s views on the origin of the
Shudras, untouchability, caste system and the hindrances to
their abolition. It also takes into account of his views on
Brahminism with special reference to the anti-Brahmin
movements and the Hindu Code. The study is also
concerned with Ambedkar’s views on constitutional matters,
his role in the Constituent Assembly, his views on the
national movement and its leaders, his conflict with Gandhi
and the Congress, problems of minorities with special
reference to Pakistan, his views on parliamentary
democracy, on socialism, on the trade union movement, on
the labour problems in the capacity of Labour Member in
the Governor’s Council formed by the British Government,
and his reflections on India’s foreign policy and others.
G. S. Lokhande’s book entitled Bhimarao Ramji
Ambedkar: a Study on Social Democracy (1982) analyses
Ambedkar’s vision of an integrated society, his views on
democracy, socialism and variety of other subjects.
After the birth centenary of Ambedkar (1991), a few
more major books have been published. In The Social
Context of an Ideology: Ambedkar’s Political and Social
Thought, M. S. Gore attempts to study the ideology that
Ambedkar proffered to register his protest against the
inequalities perpetrated by Hinduism and to promote the
causes for liberation of the untouchables of India. While
analyzing what he calls the ‘Ambedkar Ideology’, the
author then dwells on some key political issues of
contemporary India.
In his book entitled Dr. B. R. Ambedkar a Critical Study
(1993), Jogendra Sinha analyses Ambedkar’s ideas of
socialism, social justice and his views regarding the
problem of women with special reference to the Hindu
Code Bill.
Gail Omvert in her Dalit and the Democratic Revolution:
Dr Ambedkar and the Dalit Movement in Colonial India
(1994) examines Ambedkar’s role in the Dalit Movement in
India during the colonial period. Incidentally, she devotes a
whole chapter to assess the ideology of Ambedkar.
Moreover, this study focuses on Dalit movements in three
major linguistic regions in India – Maharashtra, Andhra and
Karnataka – and on the interaction of these movements
with the nationalist movement and the ‘class’ struggles of
the workers and peasants as well as with the major
ideologies of Gandhism and Marxism which guided them.
Omvert also explains why Phule-Ambedkar’s movement
has been omitted or given less care in most history books
on modern India. She analyses Ambedkarism in the light of
Ambedkar’s own total grounding in Indian reality. The title
of her book, Dalits and the Democratic Revolution
indicates her understanding of the democratic vision of B.R.
Ambedkar, though he was acquainted with many other
economic and political ideologies. In short, this study deals
with the various aspects of the politics of Ambedkarism.
In somewhat a controversial book entitled Worshipping
the False God: Ambedkar and the facts which have been
erased (1997) written by Arun Shourie, the hidden facts
that Shourie wishes to reveal are divided into three
categories: Ambedkar’s long association with the British;
the counter-productive nature of his methods in relation to
upper caste social reformers; and, his role in the drafting
of the Indian Constitution.
In his book entitled Mahatma Gandhi and Babasaheb
Ambedkar: Crusader against Caste and Untouchability
(1997), S. N. Busi observes that caste is the core of the
Hindu society and it provides sustenance and nourishment
to the principle of separateness. The caste consciousness
has injected the poison of separateness into the body politic
of the Hindu society. Therefore, as rightly observed and
vehemently advocated by Ambedkar, no social reform
movement could be successful unless annihilation of caste
is made as its principal objective. But, the author at the
same time points out, Mahatma Gandhi held the view that
mere abolition of untouchability would bring about the
desired result. The author holds that the differences in
views that existed between Mahatma Gandhi and
Babasaheb Ambedkar could be attributed to their respective
attitude towards the method of social reform. But, both
Mahatma Gandhi and Babasaheb Ambedkar succeeded in
securing the civil rights for ex-untouchables on par with
other members of the Hindu Society. The author also
elaborately analyses the ideological differences of the two
crusaders against social inequality.
D. R. Jatava in his book Political philosophy of Dr. B. R.
Ambedkar (2000) analyses the ideal and objectives for which
Dr. Ambedkar stood. The author concludes that the ideal of
mutual respect, fundamental human rights, justice,
promotion of social progress, better standards of life in larger
freedom, social security, human equality, gender respect and
tolerance, dignity of individuals, democracy and welfare of
the poor continue to be an all-embracing, important and
pressing as they were in pre-independent India.
American Journal of Social Sciences 2014; 2(1): 7-15
In Eleanor Zelliot’s From Untouchables to Dalit: Essays
on the Ambedkar Movement (2001), the Dalit movement of
Western India has been thoroughly analyzed.
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar's Political Philosophy,(2004) by
Chandrakant. D. Shivakeri attempts to point out that
Ambedkar was not a purely speculative and idealistic
political philosopher in the conventional sense like Plato
and Aristotle. Nevertheless, according to the author,
Ambedkar developed his own social and political ideals
which were essentially addressed to the common problems
of the depressed people of India. His political philosophy
attempted, according to Shivkeri, to bridge the gulf
between theory and practice and materialism and
spiritualism. The inhuman treatment meted out to his
community by the caste Hindus, his mission for the total
emancipation of the servile classes from the clutches of the
privileged caste Hindus, his total engagement with the
predicament of Indian society – all these cumulatively
helped to form Ambedkar's political ideology. The book
ultimately aims to examine Ambedkar's political
philosophy and its impact on Indian society and polity,
while highlighting his views on to man and society, state
and government, nation and nationalism, democracy,
socialism, security, social justice, education and
emancipation of the downtrodden. In addition, the book is
concerned with other aspects of Ambedkar's political
philosophy and assessment of his charismatic personality.
Ambedkar in Retrospect: Essays on Economics, Politics
and Society (2007) edited by Sukhadeo Thorat –besides
reflecting and representing the theoretical issues that are
implicated in the writings of Ambedkar – attempts to
capture the attention of the readers to the views of
Ambedkar on such issues whose relevance is intensely felt
even today. In this study, Ambedkar’s thoughts on
economic development and planning, socialism and
democracy, other issues related to nationalism,
representation and formation of states, Panchayati Raj and
political decentralization, caste discrimination and
untouchability have been analyzed. Ambedkar’s reflections
on history, question of Hindu women, education and his
suggestions for solution of the issue of social exclusion in
Indian society is also taken up by various contributors in
this volume.
In another book entitled Dr. Ambedkar and
Untouchability, (2008), C. Jaffrelot focuses on the role of
Ambedkar to the as a social theorist, as a statesman and
politician; and as a staunch opponent of caste Hinduism,
and also an advocate of Buddhism. He enquires into the
Ambedkar’s sociological thoughts and then in the strategies
of emancipation he evolved in the course of time to fight
oppression.
The book entitled B.R. Ambedkar’s Study in Law and
Society (2008) by M. Shabbir consists of quite a good
number of articles by various scholars. In “the law in
action,” intimate relationship between law and society
constitutes the pivot of thesis revolving round the
Ambedkar’s deep concern to social, economic and political
9
reforms, for ensuring justice to countless number of
populations who are termed as “oppressed class”, “downtrodden”, “depressed class”, “suppressed humanity” and
“backward classes.” It also traces the relevance of
Ambedkar’s philosophy, mission and his action-oriented
policy and programme to improve the lots of the scheduled
castes, scheduled tribes, backward classes and dalit groups
of the minorities in our contemporary era.
Shailendra K. Tiwary, in his book, Dr. Ambedkar & the
Indian Constitution (2008), critically examines the
evolution of B.R. Ambedkar’s ideas on constitutionalism
and on the nature of Indian constitution from 1919 to 1950
and brings into focus shifts in his views from time to time.
It explores how Ambedkar envisaged a system of
governance based on the principle of liberal
constitutionalism, which may offer justice and protection of
rights of the oppressed section of the population and
provide them participation in the government. The volumes
also analyses the controversies that surrounded Ambedkar
regarding his role in the constitutional development in India.
In Social and Political Thought of Dr B. R. Ambedkar
(2008) written and compiled by C. D. Naik, an attempt is
made to make aware of the contemporary situations vis-avis Ambedkar's solutions, which are still having bearing
on current socio-economic issues.
H.V. Hande, in his book Ambedkar: The Making of the
Indian Constitution, (2009) examines the contribution
made by B.R. Ambedkar to the formulation of Indian
Constitution, during various stages of its evolution. His
speeches, interventions and replies during discussions on
important Articles of the Constitution are compiled in this
book.
In view of the above discussion, it is evident that
although a large number of studies have been conducted so
far on Ambedkar to evaluate his life-long struggles, a
detailed and systematic analysis of the main strands of
Ambedkar’s political thinking is noticeably absent in all
these works.
3. Concept of Equality and Freedom
in General Connotation
Equality, like liberty, is a prominent political ideal of the
present-day world. The French Revolution (1789) was
fought for “liberty, equality, fraternity”. They constitute the
voice of the oppressed, the voice against injustice and the
voice for changing unfair social conditions. The problem of
equality and inequality has figured in political thought
since earliest times. Aristotle discovered that inequality was
a cause of revolution in many a state. He defined justice as
treating equals equally and unequal unequally. This was a
typical statement in that it insisted on recognition and
maintenance of existing inequalities in society-between
master and slave, between rich and poor, between morally
superior and inferior, and so on. There is no doubt that large
inequalities of wealth, prestige and power have always
10
Ishita Aditya: B. R. Ambedkar’s Idea on Equality and Freedom: An Indian Perspective
remained a prominent and almost universal feature of social
structure throughout human history.
Scientific thinking about the social structure led to the
demand for social change. Rousseau, in his Discourse on
the Origin of Inequality Among Men (1755), drew an
important distinction between the two types of inequalities
found in social life- Natural inequality and conventional
inequality. Natural or physical inequality, as a statement of
fact, consists in the difference of age, health, bodily
strength and qualities of mind and soul. Conventional
inequality, on the other hand, consists in the different
privileges that some men enjoy to the exclusion of others,
such as, inequalities of wealth, prestige, and power. The
other form of inequality is largely man made; it emanates
from the social order more or less deliberately designed by
men themselves. Recognition of conventional inequality
provides for ample scope to review the basis of social
distinctions and to restructure social relations according to
new concepts of social justice. Thus, the French
Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen (1789),
which was inspired by Rousseau’s revolutionary ideas,
recorded: “Men are born free and equal in rights. Social
distinctions can be based only upon public utility.”1
4. Ambedkar’s Idea on Caste and
their Interrelationship
Ambedkar proceeded to offer his own concept of caste.
The essence of the caste, according to Ambedkar, is
endogamy; caste is not merely a division of labour. It is a
hierarchy in which division of labourer is graded one above
the other.2 Caste system involves an attempt to appoint
tasks to individuals in advance, selected not on the basis of
trained original capabilities, but on that of the social status
of the parents. i.e., absence of intermarriage. In a system
where intermarriage is prohibited, it tends to alienate itself
from others and convert itself into an enclosed social unit
having an independent identity of its own3.According to
Ambedkar, “the problem of caste, then ultimately resolves
itself into one of repairing the disparity between the
marriageable units of the two sexes within it. The husband
may die before the wife and create a surplus woman, who
must be disposed of; else through intermarriage she will
violate the endogamy of the group. In like manner, the
husband may survive his wife and be surplus man, whom
the group, while it may sympathized with him for the sad
bereavement, has to dispose of, else he will marry outside
the caste will break the endogamy.4 Thus both the surplus
man and surplus woman constitute a menace to the caste if
not taken care of for not finding suitable partners inside
their prescribed circle very likely they will transgress the
boundary, marry outside and import offspring that is
foreign to the caste”.5
The study of the caste problem by Ambedkar emphasizes
that it is to be noted in four points: 1) that in spite of the
composite make-up of the Hindu population, there is a deep
cultural unity; 2) that caste is a parceling into bits of a large
cultural units; 3) that there was one caste to start with; and
4) that classes had become castes through initiation and
excommunication.6
According to him, the political revolutions in India were
preceded by the social and religious reforms led by saints.
But during the British rule, issue of political independence
got precedence over the social reform and therefore social
reform continued to remain neglected. Pointing to the
socialists, Ambedkar remarked that the socialists will have
to fight against the monster of caste either before or after
revolution. As an economic organization also, caste is a
harmful institution. He calls upon the Hindus to annihilate
the caste which is a great hindrance to social solidarity and
to set up a new social order based on the ideals of liberty,
equality and fraternity in consonance with the principles of
Democracy.7 Ambedkar states that “the Hindu society must
be reorganized on a regional basis which would recognize
the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity. For him,
caste is the real reason why there is no equality in the
Hindu society. In an ideal society there should be many
interests consciously communicated and shared. In other
words, there must be social endosmosis.8
Ambedkar’s solution to the problem thus lies in the
destruction of the caste system. In his essay, entitled ‘The
Annihilation of Caste’, Ambedkar observed:
“Yours is more difficult than the other national cause,
namely Swaraj. In the fight for Swaraj you fight with the
whole nation on your side. In this, you have to fight against
the whole nation and that too, your own. But, it is more
important than Swaraj. There is no use of having Swaraj, if
you cannot defend it. More important than the question of
defending the Swaraj is the question of defending the
Hindus under the Swaraj. In my opinion only when the
Hindu society becomes a casteless society that it can hope
to have strength enough to defend itself. Without such
internal strength, Swaraj for Hindu may turn out to be only
a step towards slavery.”9
It was contended that the objective of the caste was to
preserve purity of race and purity of blood. But, Ambedkar
said that there was a mixture of all races in all parts of the
world. According to him, the caste system could not be said
to have grown as a means of preventing the admixture of
races or as a means of maintaining purity of blood.10
Ambedkar’s theory of caste proceeds with the basic
premise that like any other society, Hindu society was
formed initially as a class system based on the principle of
labour with four classes with the following labels:
a) Brahmins : the priestly class
b) Kshatriyas : the military class;
c) Vaishyas : the merchant class;
d) Shudras : the artisan or menial class;
Ambedkar observed that at some time in the history of
Hindus, the priestly class socially detached itself from the
rest of the body of the people and through a closed door
policy became a caste by itself. The other classes being
subject to the law of social division of labour underwent
American Journal of Social Sciences 2014; 2(1): 7-15
differentiation, some into large, other into very minute
groups.
11Source: Busi, S. N, Caste: Origin and Growth, p. 7.
In this diagram, individual marriageable units (for
example, A, B and C) of each class (for example1, 2, 3) can
marry only within that class only, thus creating caste. In
other words, mobility among the classes is prohibited and
hence forming itself into an enclosed endogamous unit i.e.,
caste.
Ambedkar opines that:
“The Hindu often complains of the isolation and
exclusiveness of a gang or a clique and blames them for
anti-social spirit. But, they conveniently forget that this
anti-social spirit is the worst feature of their own caste
system. One caste enjoys singing a hymn of hate against
another caste as much as the Germans did in singing their
hymn of hate against the English during the last war. The
attempt is made to give a noble origin to one caste and an
ignoble origin to other castes. This anti-social spirit is not
confined to caste alone. It has gone deeper and has
poisoned the mutual relations of the sub caste as well.”12
He continues to argue:
“My ideal would be a society based on liberty, equality
and fraternity.’ An ideal society must be mobile. There must
be social endosmosis. This is fraternity which is only
another name of democracy. Democracy is not merely a
form of government. It is primarily a mode of associated
living, of conjoint communicated experience. It is
essentially an attitude of respect and reverence towards
fellowmen. Few object to liberty in the sense of a right to
free movement, in the sense of a right to life and limb.
There is no objection to liberty in the sense of a right to
property, tools and materials has been necessary for earning
a living to keep the body in due state of health.”13
Moreover, Ambedkar raised another important question
as to why there was no social revolution in India. He
himself answered that:
‘the lower classes of Hindus have been completely
disabled for direct action on account of this wretched
system of Chatur Varnya.’14
He further said that the lower classes were condemned to
be lowly. They did not know the way and means of escape
and not having the means of escape, they became
reconciled to eternal servitude which they accepted as their
11
inescapable fate. The weak in Europe has had in his
freedom of military service his physical weapon, in
suffering his political weapon and in education his moral
weapons. All the three weapons were denied to the masses
in India by Chaturvarnya. Ambedkar concluded:
‘There cannot be a more degrading the system of social
organization than Chaturvarnya. It is system which
deadens, paralyses and cripples the people from helpful
activity’15
Historically speaking, as Ambedkar points out, Mourya
was a period when Chaturvarnya was completely
annihilated. This period in the history was a period of
freedom, greatness and glory. The Mahabharata and
Purana were full of the incidents of the strife between
Brahmins and Kshatriyas. There was no harmony.
Ambedkar come to be convinced that ‘Chaturvarna cannot
be an ideal.’16
Additionally, Ambedkar pointed out that caste among the
non-Hindus was fundamentally different from that of the
Hindus. Caste was very essential in the case of Hindus.
That caste has not the same social significance among the
non-Hindus as it has among Hindus is clear if one takes
into consideration the consequence which followed breach
of caste.
5. Ambedkar’s Idea on Equality and
Freedom
The Hindu Social Order in India has often been accused
of being an undemocratic and unjust order wherein a large
section of its members are doomed to a permanent
degraded life by reason of birth. Ambedkar was a bitter
critic of Hinduism. The impact of the principle of
inequality is quite apparent and glaring in the Hindu social
order. In view of Ambedkar, the Hindu social order does
not recognize equal need, equal work or equal ability as the
basis of reward for labour. Its motto is that in regard to the
distribution of the good things of life, those who are
reckoned as the highest must get the most and the best and
those who are classified as the lowest must get least and
worst.17
The Hindu social order comprises of castes, namely,
Brahmins, Khatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras. Ambedkar
observed: “In Hindu social order, there is no room for
individual merit and no consideration of individual justice.
If the individual has a privilege, it is not because it is due to
him personal. The privilege goes with the class, and if he is
found to enjoy it, it is because he belongs to that class.
Contrarily, if an individual is suffering from a wrong, it is
not because he by his conduct deserves it. The disability is
the disability imposed upon the class and if he is found to
be labouring under it, it is because he belongs to that
class.”18
According to Ambedkar, there are two fundamental
tenets of a free social order. They are: (i) individual is an
end in himself and the aim and object of society is the
12
Ishita Aditya: B. R. Ambedkar’s Idea on Equality and Freedom: An Indian Perspective
growth of the individual and the development of his
personality. Society is not above the individual. But, the
individual has to subordinate himself to society because
such subordinate is for his betterment and (ii) the terms of
associated life among members of society must be based on
the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity.19
The question is whether Hinduism believes in equality.
The cancerous caste system is at the root of it. The caste
system and equality are incompatible to one another. The
principle of gradation and rank is the essence of caste
system. The caste system has recognized slavery in inverse
order of status and maintained inequality in every sphere of
human activity-social, political, economic, legal, religious
etc.
a) In social hierarchy, Hinduism places Brahmin at the
first rank. Kshatriya is assigned the second rank.
Vaishya and the Shudra have been assigned the third
and fourth rank. It does not stop with mere gradation
but injects the principles of graded inequality by
ordaining descending scale of contempt and ascending
scale of reverence.
b) In the political field, the members of the caste system
have no political rights to elect a government of their
choice.
c) In the economic sphere, the members of caste system
have no economic independence or economic security
and there is no choice of avocation. They have to
merely follow their ancestral callings. Avocation being
pre-ordained, individual merit, capacity or inclination
to work has no place in such a system.
d) In the legal domain, an irrational and obnoxious
criminal jurisprudence based on the principle of
inequality is prescribed. Punishments are inflicted on
the organ concerned of procreation as if the offending
organ has a will of its own .Inhuman character of
punishment is pronounced, the punishment being
disproportionate to the offence committed. Inequality
is ingrained in the Hindu criminal jurisprudence.
Despite offence being the same, higher punishments
are inflicted on the lower castes and lower
punishments for the superior castes. In other words,
social inequality is the solid foundation of the Hindu
Social Jurisprudence.
e) In the realm of religion, Hinduism prohibits initiation
(Upanayanam) to Shudras. Initiation is effected by the
investiture of a person with the sacred thread.
Hinduism does not allow a Shudra to read the Veda.
He cannot become a Sanyasi. The reason for such a
prohibition is that if a Shudra becomes a Sanyasi, the
higher castes are automatically deprived of his service
without which they cannot live in comfort and luxury.
Shudras are not allowed to read the Veda, or chant
Gayatri Mantra because such acts are believed to
purify one’s body and soul. The priestly caste has
conspired and contrived to see that a Shudra does not
sanctify his body and soul. This is a glaring instance
of how Hinduism not only denied equality but also
denied sacred character of human personality.20
Hindus claim a great “social utility” to the caste system.
This claim lacks sound foundation. Far from having “social
utility”, it acts as a divisive force. According to Ambedkar,
the caste system is not only a division of labour but also an
unnatural division of labourers in which the divisions of
labourers are graded one above the other with a spirit of
superiority and inferiority. Elsewhere than in India, the
division of labour is based on individual aptitude,
efficiency and capacity. Hinduism ordains that one should
follow his ancestral calling. Ambedkar observed:
Caste devitalizes man. It is a process of sterilization.
Education, wealth, labour are all necessary for every
individual if he is to reach free and full manhood. Mere
education without wealth and labour is barren. Wealth
without education and labour is brutal. Each is necessary
for the growth of man.21
In Hindu social order, there is no place for individual
merit and individual justice and the spirit of fraternity and
equality absent in the Hindu social order. The following are
the three principles underlying the Hindu social order: a)
principles of graded inequality; b) fixity of hereditary
occupation for each caste; and c) fixation of people within
their respective classes.
Brahmin may become the slave of another Brahmin, but
he cannot be the slave of those lower in his social status.
The effect of this rule is that it prohibits enslavement of the
superior castes by the inferior castes. However, Manu was
particularly careful to ensure that this permission does not
violate the principle of inequality. He, therefore,
proclaimed that inter-caste marriage was permissible but in
the inverse social order, as done in the case of slavery. Even
in the matter of law, inequality is striking and apparent. The
treatment given to a witness in the court of law differs
depending upon the caste to which a person belongs. Under
the Hindu social order, the nature and quantum of
punishment depending upon the caste to which the offender
belongs although the nature of offence might be the same.
Severest punishments were prescribed for the lowest castes
in respect of the same offences.22
According to Ambedkar, “Does the Hindu social order
recognize equality”? He said, “The answer is negative”.
That men are born equal is a doctrine which is repugnant to
the Hindu social order. According to the Hindu social order
thought, it is true that men are the children of prajapati, the
creator of the universe; they are not equal on that account.
For they were created from the different parts of the body
of Prajapati. The Brahmins were created from the mouth,
the Kshatriya from the arms, the Vishya from his thighs and
Shudra from his feet. In the Biological sense, the Hindu
social order does not bother to examine whether the
doctrine is founded in a fact. If it was not a fact, i.e., men
were not equal in their character and natural endowments,
of character and intelligence so much the better. On the
other hand, if it was a fact, i.e., men were equal in character
and natural endowments, so much the worse for the
doctrine.23
American Journal of Social Sciences 2014; 2(1): 7-15
This critical evolution of the various characteristics of
caste leaves no doubt that prohibition or rather the absence
of intermarriage-endogamy; to be concise, is the only one
that can be called the essence of caste when rigidly
understood. But some may deny this on abstract
anthropological ground, for there exist endogamous groups
without giving rise to the problem of caste. The various
races of India occupying definite territories have more or
less fused into one another and do possess cultural unity,
which is the only criterion of a homogeneous population.
Caste in India means an artificial chopping off of the
population into fixed and definite units, each one prevented
from fusing into another through the custom of endogamy.
Thus the conclusion is inevitable that endogamy is the only
characteristics that peculiar to caste.24
The study of the caste problem by Ambedkar involved
four main points: That in spite of the composite make-up of
the Hindu population, there was a deep cultural unity; that
caste was a parceling into bits of a large cultural units; that
there was one caste to start with; and that classes had
become castes through initiation and excommunication.25
In this time, British colonialism and western education
gave Indian society a very peculiar twist. They gave some
new outlook to the people of India and personally think that
Ambedkar himself was a product of this age. In colonialism,
many nationalist freedom fighters wanted the establishment
of an independent India but Ambedkar was different from
the rest. His task of emancipation of the Indian people did
not end with the liberation from British colonialism but
went to the extent of seeking to wipe out the structures of
oppression within the Indian social system. In his reply to
Mahatma Gandhi, Ambedkar states that “the Hindu society
must be reorganized on a regional basis which would
recognize the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity”.
For him, caste is the real reason why there is no equality in
the Hindu society. Once again in his reason why there is no
equality in the Hindu society. Once again in his reply to the
Mahatma, he says:
Caste has ruined the Hindus, the reorganization of the
Hindu society on the basis of Chaturvarna is impossible
because the Varna Vyavastha is like a leaky pot or like a
man running at the nose. It is incapable of sustaining itself
by its own virtue and has an inherent tendency to
degenerate into a caste system unless there is a legal
sanction behind it which can be enforced against everyone
transgressing his Varna That the reorganization of the
Hindu society on the basis of Chaturvarnya is harmful
because the effect of the Varnavyavastha is to degrade the
masses by denying them opportunity to acquired
knowledge and to emasculate them by denying them the
right to be armed.26
Ambedkar’s solution to his problem is the destruction of
the caste system. In ‘The Annihilation of Caste’, Ambedkar
opines:
Yours is more difficult than the other national cause,
namely Swaraj. In the fight for Swaraj, you fight with the
whole nation on your side. In this, you have to fight against
13
the whole nation and that too, your own. But, it is more
important than Swaraj. There is no use of having Swaraj, if
you cannot defend it. More important than the question of
defending the Swaraj is the question of defending the
Hindus under the Swaraj. In my opinion only when the
Hindu society becomes a casteless society that it can hope
to have strength enough to defend itself. Without such
internal strength, Swaraj for Hindu may turn out to be only
a step towards slavery.27
Ambedkar’s vision of a new social order can be summed
up in the way in which he so often did, with the great
slogan of the French revolution, “liberty, equality,
fraternity.” In sum, it can be said that in view of Ambedkar,
the society must be based on reason, and not on atrocious
traditions of caste system. Therefore, in ‘The Annihilation
of Caste’, he suggests as a means, the annihilation of caste
maintained through Shastras, “Make every man and
woman free from the thraldom of the Shastras, cleanse
their minds of the pernicious notions founded on the
Shastras and he or she will inter-dine and inter-marry”. He
found education, inter-caste marriage and inter-dine as
methods, which may eliminate castes and patriarchy,
maintained through endogamy. He earnestly eradicate
Brahmanism because in view of Ambedkar, Brahmanism
does not mean the power, privileges and interests of the
Brahmans as a community but actually it is the negation of
the spirit of ‘Liberty, Equality and Fraternity’. In that sense,
it is rampant in all classes and is not confined to the
Brahmans alone, though they have been the originators of
it” (reported in Times of India, February 14, 1938). In
taking these Brahmanism and capitalism as the focus of
struggle, Ambedkar was inclined to accept a Marxist
explanation of social-economic exploitation with only the
necessity of adding an appreciation for the role of caste as
an autonomous, exploitative and oppressive social structure.
Ambedkar was a liberal thinker who believed that rights
were necessary for full development of human personality.
But, he was particularly concerned with the condition of the
Scheduled castes that were facing discrimination not only
by the British but also by the local feudal class. The
growing consciousness among the dalits regarding their
rights and liberties was a major source of influence on the
thinking of Ambedkar. But, at the same time by his various
statements on rights and liberties of the Scheduled castes he
also contributed to the development of this consciousness.
In all his statements and memoranda that he submitted in
the earlier phase, he laid emphasis on the rights of the
scheduled castes and their necessary safeguards. He
advocated effective rights, like end of discrimination and
also special safeguards for them. Throughout his life, it was
the values of the French revolution, liberty, equality and
fraternity (community), summed up in “social justice,”
which defined Ambedkar’s orientation.
A detailed analysis of his life and mission reveals that
Ambedkar held the basic and fundamental norm, to be
equality- social, economic and political, from which he
proceeded to lay down a collection of ‘ought’ propositions;
14
Ishita Aditya: B. R. Ambedkar’s Idea on Equality and Freedom: An Indian Perspective
in this hierarchy of ‘ought’, the initial fundamental ‘ought’
on which the validity of all the other ultimately rests, the
fundamental norm seems to be the social equality, the
justification for the rest of the legal reforms and changes he
persistently fought for. It was a society full of social
inequalities in which Ambedkar was born. The humiliation
he experienced in such an in egalitarian society bore on
imprint in all thought his life.
[5]
Ibid., p. 10
[6]
Ibid., p. 22.
[7]
Ibid., p. xv
[8]
BAWS, Annihilation of Caste, vol.1, p.57.
[9]
Ibid., p. 80
[10]
Ibid., p. 48.
6. Conclusion
[11]
S.N. Busi, op.cit., p. 7.
[12]
BAWS, Annihilation of Caste, op.cit., vol-1, p. 51.
[13]
Ibid., p. 57.
[14]
Ibid., p.63.
[15]
Ibid., pp. 63-64.
[16]
Ibid., p. 63
[17]
Ibid., p.332.
[18]
BAWS, The Hindu Social Order: Its Essential Principles.
vol.3. p.111.
[19]
Ibid., pp. 99-100.
[20]
Ibid ., p.111.
[21]
S. N. Busi. Mahatma Gandhi and Babasaheb AmbedkarCrusader Against Caste and Untochability, p. 67.
[22]
BAWS, op.cit., vol-3. pp. 68-69.
[23]
S. N. Busi, op.cit, p.67.
[24]
BAWS, op.cit, vol-3. p.106.
[25]
BAWS, op.cit, vol. 1, pp.8-9.
[26]
Ibid., p. 22.
[27]
Ibid., p.86.
[28]
Keer, Dhananjay: Dr. Ambedkar: Life and Mission,
Popular Prakashan, Bombay, 1971.
[29]
Kuber, W.N: B.R.Ambedkar –A Critical Study, Publication
Division, Ministry of
Information and Broadcasting,
Government of India, New Delhi, 1987.
[30]
Lokhande, G.S: Bhimarao Ramji Ambedkar: A study on
Social Democracy, Intellectual Publishing House, New
Delhi, 1982.
[31]
Gore, M.S: The Social Context of an Ideology:
Ambedkar’s Political and Social Thought, Sage
Publication India Pvt.Ltd. New Delhi,1993.
References
[32]
Sinha, Jogendra : “Dr. Ambedkar –a critical study”,
Vijay Publication,1993.
[1]
O. P. Gauba. An introduction to Political Theory, fourth
edition, pp.331-332
[33]
Tiwary, Shailendra K, “Dr. Ambedkar & The Indian
Constitution”,Shubhi Publications,2008.
[2]
BAWS, Annihilation of Caste, vol.1, p.47.
[34]
[3]
Ibid., p. 47.
Omvert, Gail: Dalits and the Democratic Revolution: Dr
Ambedkar and the Dalit Movement in Colonial India,
Sage Publications India Pvt.Ltd. New Delhi, 1994.
[4]
BAWS, Castes in India, op.cit., p. 10.
Ambedkar was one of the pioneers of social justice in
India. It was Ambedkar who provided new dimensions to
the concept of justice. We regard him as the ‘Champion of
Social justice.' He was himself a victim of social injustice,
faced its difficulties; and he not tolerated the injustice, but
boldly fought against them. Ambedkar had a liberal concept
of justice. Like Gandhi, for Ambedkar, justice is simply
another name of liberty, equality and fraternity.’ In this
sense, the core value of Ambedkar concept of justice is
human equality, equal distribution of the welfare materials
and discrimination less society. Thus, the spirit of social
justice, according to Ambedkar, gives a significant place to
mutual sympathy and respect.
Whatever he achieved, that would have been possible for
his strength of character which manifested his individual
charisma. As a statesman, scholar, crusader of downtrodden
and above all a spiritual guide, Ambedkar has left an
indelible impression on the Indian History. His contribution
to uplift the downtrodden made him a cult figure among the
depressed classes. He now lives in the heart and mind of
the million of' the suffering people. They now look at him
as immortal soul whose memory will even guide the nation
on the path of social justice, liberty and equality. Thus,
Ambedkarism is of great relevance to Indian society even
today in achieving social justice, removal of untouchability,
in establishing equality and freedom and true democracy.
Democratic socialism is the key note of his political
thought and constitutionalism is the only way to achieve it.
In conclusion, it can be said that this research gives
closer and analytical insight into the thoughts of Ambedkar
on equality and freedom and provides an answer to the
question of whether we achieve religious tolerance, human
equality and freedom, true democracy in the society, justice
and peace in the light of political philosophy of Ambedkar
whose memory will ever guide the nation on the path of
justice, liberty and equality.
American Journal of Social Sciences 2014; 2(1): 7-15
[35]
Shourie, Arun, Worshippping the False Gods-Ambedkar,
and the facts which have been erased, Publisher:
Rupa&Co,1997.
[36]
Jatava,D.R: The Political Philosophy of B.R.Ambedkar,
Phoenix Publishing Agency, Agra ,1965.
[37]
Chandrakant.D.Shivakeri, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar's Political
Philosophy’,Anmol Publisher, 2004.
[38]
Thorat, Sukhodeo (ed), Ambedkar in Retrospect: Essays
on Economics, Politics and Society, Rawat Publications,
2007.
15
[39]
Naik, C. D: Social and Political Thought of Dr. B.R.
Ambedkar, Arise Pub, 2008.
[40]
Shabbir, M(ed), B.R.Ambedkar: Study in Law and Society,
Rawat Publication, 2008.
[41]
Tiwary, Shailendra K, “Dr. Ambedkar & The Indian
Constitution”,Shubhi Publications,2008.
[42]
Hande, H.V., “Ambedkar: The making of the Indian
Constitution”, Mac Millan, 2009.