4/27/2016

AmbedkarsLegacy:CritiqueOfReligion,QuestForSocialJustice&TheParadoxOfConstitutionalism|ColomboTelegraph

colombotelegraph.com
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/ambedkarslegacycritiqueofreligionquestforsocialjusticetheparadoxof
constitutionalism/

AmbedkarsLegacy:CritiqueOfReligion,QuestForSocial
Justice&TheParadoxOfConstitutionalism
ByCOLOMBO_TELEGRAPH

ByJayadevaUyangoda
MayIbeginmytalkthiseveningbythankingHisExcellencyY.K.Sinhathe
IndianHighCommissionerinColomboforinvitingmetodeliverthislecture
onB.R.Ambedkar?Thiseventispartofaseriesofcelebrationsin
connectionwiththe125thbirthanniversaryofBabasahebAmbedkar,which
fellonthe14thofApril.Iamafraidmytalkmaynotcelebrategreat
Ambedkarsmemoryandlegacyassuch.Itwillonlypresentsomedisjointed
andhurriedlyconstructedthoughtsaboutthelifeandlegacyofthisgreatson
ofSouthAsia.
AmbedkarsnameiswellknowninSriLanka.InSinhalesesociety,the
Prof.JayadevaUyangoda
popularcultureofwhichIamsomewhatfamiliarwith,Ambedkarisknownas
theleaderofIndiasHarijancommunities.Theworddalitisnotinmuchusein
Sinhalesesociety.TheGandhianneologismofharijanisbetterknown.AmbedkarisrespectedastheHarijan
leaderwhoembracedBuddhismalongwithseveralthousandsofhisfollowers.SinhaleseBuddhistsare
particularlysympathetictoAmbedkarandhissocialreformmovement.Forthem,Ambedkarsproject
constitutedacritiqueandarejectionofHinduism.ThisisdespitethefactthatBuddhismhashistoricallyand
intermsofeliteaswellaspopularpracticesbeencloselyinterwovenwithHinduism.Quiteindependentof
Ambedkar,SriLankanBuddhistshaveasomewhatambivalentattitudetowardsHinduismandHindu
traditionsaswell.ItisalmostliketheirambivalencetowardsIndiaingeneral,assomeoftheirintellectuals
andprofessionalsseemtobeinclinedtodemonstratethesedays.

https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/ambedkarslegacycritiqueofreligionquestforsocialjusticetheparadoxofconstitutionalism/

1/9

4/27/2016

AmbedkarsLegacy:CritiqueOfReligion,QuestForSocialJustice&TheParadoxOfConstitutionalism|ColomboTelegraph

Ambedkar

Atthesametime,talkingpubliclyofAmbedkarbyanordinarynonIndianSouthAsianbeforeanaudience
withevenafewwellinformedIndiancitizensisnomeantask.Amebdkarslife,workandthoughthavebeen
understood,interpreted,appropriatedandcommentedonavarietyofdifferentwaysinIndia.ASriLankan,
followingthedebatesandcontroversiestakingplaceintheIndianmediaaroundAmbedkarslegacy,can
onlybeperplexedbythesheercomplexityofeventheveryideaofwhathislegacymightmean.Three
recenteventsoccurredinIndiaaddtothisunendingpoliticaldramaofmakingsenseofthelife,workand
thoughtofoneofthegreatestIndiansofthetwentiethcentury.ThesuicideofRohithVemula,apost
graduatestudentoftheHyderabadCentralUniversity,thearrestandreleasefromcustodyof,andthe
subsequentspeechby,KanhaiyaKumarofNewDelhisJawaharlalNehruUniversity,andthepublicembrace
ofBuddhismbythemotherandbrotherofRohithVemulaonthedayofAmbedkarJayanthilastweekare
thesethreeveryrecenteventsinwhichtheinvocationofAmbedkarslegacyhasbeenmadetosome
dramaticeffect.
Havingthesemostcontemporaryeventsinthebackdrop,inthistalk,Iwanttofocusonthreeaspectsof
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/ambedkarslegacycritiqueofreligionquestforsocialjusticetheparadoxofconstitutionalism/

2/9

4/27/2016

AmbedkarsLegacy:CritiqueOfReligion,QuestForSocialJustice&TheParadoxOfConstitutionalism|ColomboTelegraph

Ambedkarslegacy,whichIpresumearenotverywellknowninSriLanka.ThefirstisAmbedkarscritiqueof
religion,religionassuchaswellasHinduismandthereinterpretationofBuddhism.Thesecondishisquest
forjusticeandqualityfortheuntouchablecommunitiesinIndiathathesoughttorepresentandgivepolitical
leadershipto.ThethirdisAmbedkarscomplexrelationshipwithconstitutionalismandtheconstitutionalstate
aspathwaystoensuringegalitariansocialreform.
Asiswellknown,AmbedkarwasthechairmanoftheDraftingCommitteeofIndiasfirstConstituent
Assembly.Foreminentlyjustifiablereasons,heisrememberedasthearchitectofindependentIndias
constitution,whichisarguablyoneofthemostrespectedanddistinguishedconstitutionaldocumentsofthe
worldtoday.
ItisprobablysuchagreatironyandcoincidencethatthearchitectsofthefirstconstitutionsofbothIndiaand
PakistanweredalitleadersfromIndia.InPakistanscase,itwasthedestinyofadalitleaderfromBengal,
JogendraNathMandal,tobeentrustedwiththetaskofdraftingthenewnationsfirstconstitution.Afterthe
creationofPakistaninAugust1947,MandalmigratedtoKrachchi,becameamemberofthefirstConstituent
AssemblyandthenitsChairman,andsubsequentlytheMinisterofLawandLabour.Ambedkarwas
independentIndiasfirstMinisterofLawaswellasthechairmanoftheconstitutionaldraftingcommitteeof
theConstituentAssembly.Therewasanotherparallelbetweenthesetwodalitleadersturnedconstitutional
architectsofIndiaandPakistanrespectively.Bothquittheirpositionsindisappointmentandfrustrationwithin
justafewyearsofbeingministersoflawandconstitutionalarchitects.JogendraNathMandalresignedfrom
theMuslimLeagueandtheCabinetafterMohamedAliJinnahsdeath,andmigratedbacktoIndiain1951.
Ambedkarquitthecongressgovernmentthesameyear,in1951.Fiveyearslater,in1956,hestagedastill
greaterquitting,bypubliclyleavingHinduism,alongwithnearlyfourhundredthousandofwomenand
childrenofdalitcommunities.ByrenouncingHinduism,AmbedkarandhisfellowdalitsembracedBuddhism
inanactofmassconversion.Itwasalsoanunprecedentedactofmassdefianceandselfassertion.
Atthispoint,abriefbiographicalaccountofAmbedkarisinorder.BhimraoRamjiAmbedkarwasbornon
April14,1891intheBritishfoundedcantonmenttownofMhow,inthethenMaharashtra(Sangharakshitha,
1986).AsanybiographerofAmbedkarwouldmentionintheveryfirstpage,ifnotthefirstparagraph,asthe
mostimportantpieceofdemographicdatapertainingtothelifeofthehero,Ambedkarsfamilybelongedto
theHinduMaharcommunity,oneoftheuntouchablecastesinWesternIndia.Theworduntouchable,which
isusedinIndiatorefertotheextremelymarginalizedandexcludedcastecommunities,seemstobea
twentiethcenturylinguisticinvention.Ambedkarusesthiswordinhis1936essay,AnnihilationofCasteas
theEnglishtranslationoftheSanskrit,Hindi,Marathiwordanthyajaliterally,thelastborn.Theword
panchamaalsohasasimilardiscursivemeaningthefifthborn.Thelastandthefifthinboththese
constructionsrefertocommunitiesthatareplacedoutsidethefourfoldvarnastructureoftheIndiancaste
system.
BiographersofAmbedkarhardlymissanotherpoint,hisexceptionaleducationalachievements.Ambedkar
succeededincollectingtwodoctorates,onefromNewYorksColumbiaUniversityandtheother,aD.Sc.
fromtheLSE,despitetheformidablesocialandstructuralbarriersthatcouldhavepreventedhimfrom
movingbeyondsecondaryeducationatbest.HealsostudiedlawinEnglandandbecameabarrister.
ProfessorLordBhikhuParekh,anIndianBritishacademicoriginallyfromGujaratwithfairlyhumblesocial
origins,wasquicktonotethefollowingpointswhenhedeliveredtheinauguralAmbedkarMemorialLecture
attheAmbedkarUniversityinNewDelhiin2009:AmbedkarwasthemosthighlyeducatedIndianofall
times.AndhewrotemorescholarlybooksthanalmostalltheIndianleaders.Hewasalsoagreatpolitical
leaderandsocialandpoliticalthinkeroftwentiethcenturyIndia(Parekh,2009)Sangharakshita(1986)
makesasimilarassertionaboutAmbedkar.Accordingtohim,althoughAmbedkarhadbeenaBuddhistfor
onlysevenweeks,hediedintheseventhweekduringthatperiodhehadprobablydonemoreforthe
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/ambedkarslegacycritiqueofreligionquestforsocialjusticetheparadoxofconstitutionalism/

3/9

4/27/2016

AmbedkarsLegacy:CritiqueOfReligion,QuestForSocialJustice&TheParadoxOfConstitutionalism|ColomboTelegraph

promotionofBuddhismthananyotherIndiansinceAshoka.DoI,withmyverylimitedfamiliaritywithIndias
politicalandintellectualhistories,haveanythingmoretoadd?
ConversiontoliberalconstitutionalismisanotherofAmbedkarssignificantbiographicalevents.Althoughhis
biographerswouldusuallyacknowledgethetremendouscontributionAmbedkarmadetomodernIndiaby
guidingandgivingleadershiptothedraftingoftheindependentconstitution,hardlyanybodywould
characterizehisinvolvementwithconstitutionmakingasaconversionassuch.But,inthislecture,Iwilluse
conversionasametaphortodescribeAmbedkarsexperimentwithbuildingaliberalconstitutionalstatefor
postcolonialIndiaasanactofconversionthatendedineventualdisillusionment.Ambedkarsembracingof
Buddhismin1956canbeinterpretedashissecondconversioninsearchforsocialequality.
Indiasconstitution,towhichAmbedkargaveintellectualleadershipaswellaspoliticalandlegalform,isin
factahybridliberalconstitution.Itshybridityrestsonitscreativesynthesisofliberalconstitutionalism,
centeredontheprincipleofindividualrightsofcitizens,withasocialdemocraticandsocialegalitarian
premiseofcollectiverights.ThelatterwasintheagendaofIndianNationalCongressaswellsincethe1930s
withinadiscourseofsocialjustice.However,Ambedkarhadaparticularreasontoconstitutionalizecollective
rights.InAmbedkarsearlywritings,itwastheclassicalEuropeanconceptofequalityandindividualfreedom
thatguidedhiscritiqueofHinducastesystemandadvocacyofequality.Infact,hefreelyusedthesloganof
theFrenchrevolutionliberty,equalityandfraternityinadvancinghisvisionofsocialtransformation.It
wasalsoAmbedkar,morethantheIndiannationalCongress,whosingularlyarguedforaradicalremaking
ofIndia,groundedonradicalsocialequality.TherelentlesscritiqueofHinduismandthehegemonyofcaste
Hinduelitesandtheadvocacyofannihilationofcastethiswasthetitleofapolemicalpamphlet,thetextof
anundeliveredlecture,publishedin1936markedthefirstphaseofAmbedkarspoliticalandintellectual
life.ThedraftingoftheconstitutionandbeingIndiasfirstlawministercanbeinterpretedasrepresenting
secondphaseofAmbedkarslife,from1946to1951.Thethirdphaseisthefiveyearsfrom1951to1956.
Thesecondphaseismostimportanttounderstand,appreciateandevaluateAmbedkarspoliticaland
intellectuallegacy.ThespecificityofAmbedkarscareerduringthissecondphaseseemstobemarkedby
twofactors:(a)hisentryintoaCongressgovernment,afterbeingoutsidetheIndianNationalCongress
throughouttheperiodbefore1946,and(b)hiscommitmenttomakingthepostcolonialIndianstatebased
onliberalsocietaldemocraticprinciplesofconstitutionalism.
IntakinguptheresponsibilityofdraftingindependentIndiasconstitution,Ambedkarhadobviouslydecided
torefocushisenergiesonasetofnewquestions:WhatkindofIndia,whatkindofIndianstateandwhat
typeofIndiancitizentobecreatedthroughconstitutionalengineering?AllmodernIndianpoliticalleaders
duringthepreindependenceperiodGandhi,Nehru,Patel,Ambedkar,forexamplehadgrappledwitha
simple,yetprofoundlydifficultissue:whatisittobeanIndian?Thisquestionhasonceagainreappearedin
Indiatodaywithdramaticshifts,turnsandconsequences.Ambedkarsvision,sharedwiththeCongress,was
foranIndiainwhichallIndiancitizenshadconstitutionallyguaranteedrightstoequality,justiceandrights.It
wasalsoanIndiainwhichthestateplayedanactiveroleinenablingthemarginalizedmassesthespaceand
opportunitiesfortheaccesstopositiverights.Theconstitutioninitsdirectiveprinciplesaswellasmanyother
substantiveclauseswastoembodythisapproachtosocialtransformationthroughconstitutional
engineering.
Ambedkar,whowasneveramemberoftheCongress,hadearlierbeenharshlycriticalofbothGandhiand
Nehru.HehadbeenattackingHinduismandcasteHindusrelentlessly.Yethehadthesingularhonourof
headingthesevenmemberdraftingcommitteeoftheConstituentAssembly.Thatwasin1947.Thatwas
alsotheyearinwhichcolonialIndiabecameindependentIndiaafterthepartitionofBritishIndia.Prime
MinisterNehruinvitedAmbedkartobethelawministerofthenewgovernment.Theconstitutionmaking
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/ambedkarslegacycritiqueofreligionquestforsocialjusticetheparadoxofconstitutionalism/

4/9

4/27/2016

AmbedkarsLegacy:CritiqueOfReligion,QuestForSocialJustice&TheParadoxOfConstitutionalism|ColomboTelegraph

processwasslowandNehruusedtomakesomecausticremarksabouttheslowprogressofdraftingofthe
newconstitutionbyAmbedkarandhisteam.Nehrusimpatiencewiththeslownessoftheconstitutional
processwassoondepictedinacartoon,drawnbyKeshavShankarPillai,aleadingpoliticalcartoonistof
Indiaatthetime.Thecartoonoriginallypublishedin1949depictedNehruholdingawhip,standingbehind
Ambedkarwhowassittingonthebackofasnail.Ambedkarwasdrivingthesnailthatdidnotseemtobe
verykeentomoveforward.ThesnailrepresentedIndiasconstitution.
Thiscartoonwasreproducedinahighschooltextbookinpoliticalscience,published2006byIndias
NationalCouncilofEducationalResearchandTraining.In2012,severaldalitorganizationsobjectedtothe
inclusionofthiscartooninaschooltextbook,onthegroundsthatitinsultedthedalitsandtheiriconicleader.
Theissuesoonbecameamajorpubliccontroversy,andthegovernmentatthetimereactedbyadmitting
thatthecartoonwasinappropriateandwithdrawingthetextbookfromcirculation.Whatseemstohave
offendedthedalitactivistswasthathighcasteNehruwaswhippingAmbedkar,thedalit.
Thatobviouslywasareductionistreadingofthecartoon.But,asweallknow,populistpoliticsofallhues
thrivesonreductionistreadings.TheactionbythethenMinisterofHumanResources,aneminentliberal
lawyerinDelhi,amountedtobookbanning,notaveryliberalactionbyagovernment.Interestingly,whenthe
cartoonwasfirstpublished,therewasnocriticismofit.Butsixdecadesaftertheconstitution,reservation
andpositivediscriminationpolicies,andwithdalitcommunitiesachievinggreaterlevelsofpolitical
mobilizationandevenrepresentationinnationalandstategovernments,dalitpoliticsinIndiaseemstohave
enteredaphaseofintensepoliticalsensitivity,withpostliberalovertones.Theangryreactionbydalit
activistsandpoliticianstoAshisNandysunreflectivelyintriguingcommentsaboutdalitsmadeattheJaipur
LiteraryFestivalin2013generatedasimilarpubliccontroversy.Itragedthroughacoupleofweeks,
attractingagreatdealofmediaattentionandcommensuratepublicangerexpressedbydalit
spokespersons.Aredalitelitesandactivistsor,thedalitpoliticalandintellectualclassnowmoresensitive
tonegativecritiquewhichtheircommunitiesareroutinelysubjectedtothantheywerein1949when
AmbedkarwasdraftingIndiasconstitution,andShankarPillaypublishedthecartooninhismagazine?Or,is
theresomethingqualitativelynewinIndiasdalitpoliticalconsciousnesstodaythatmakescritiqueitself
negativepolitics?Doesitmeanthatthisnewpoliticalsensitivityisframedoutsidethediscourseofliberal
constitutionalismthathastraditionallyprivilegedfreedomofexpressionasacardinalvirtueofmodern
politicallife?DoesitshowthetriumphofpostliberalpoliticsinIndiatowhichAshisNandyhimselfmayhave
madeacontribution,thoughinadvertently?Thesequestionsdonotseemhavebeenadequatelyexploredas
yetinIndiascontemporaryintellectualdiscussions.
ParadoxofConstitutionalism
OnthequestionofequalityandjusticeforIndiasuntouchablecommunities,Ambedkarspoliticalandsocial
beliefsseemtohaverestedontwosignificantassumptions.Thefirstwastheefficacyofliberaldiscourseof
equality,libertyandfraternity.Thesecondwastheusefulnessofshapingastatetoadvancesuchaliberal
projectofequalityandjusticebyconstitutionalizingarevisionistframeworkofequalityinwhichgrouprights,
inadditiontoindividualrights,arerecognized.BoththeseassumptionswerenotconfinedtoAmbedkars
politicalthoughtalone.TheywereapartoftheNehruvianCongressprojectaswell.Whatisparadoxically
significant,nevertheless,isthat,asAmbedkarrealizedbeforelong,actuallywithinjustfouryearsasthelaw
minister,theIndianstatehadbeguntoacquireasocialmajoritariancharactervisavisthedalitcommunities,
despitealltheconstitutionalistsafeguardsprovidedforitsprevention.
ReadingbiographiesofAmbedkar,oneisstruckbyaprofoundparadoxthatdefinedthelastphaseofhislife.
HisexperimentwithconstitutionalismtoensureequalityandjusticetothevastmassofIndiasuntouchable
communitiesfailed.Thisfailureseemstohaveculminatedintherejectionbythecabinetandparliamenthis
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/ambedkarslegacycritiqueofreligionquestforsocialjusticetheparadoxofconstitutionalism/

5/9

4/27/2016

AmbedkarsLegacy:CritiqueOfReligion,QuestForSocialJustice&TheParadoxOfConstitutionalism|ColomboTelegraph

attempttoreformHinducommonlawframeworkthroughauniformcivilcode.Whenthecabinetstalledthis
significantreformbill,whichincidentallyaimedatempoweringwomentoo,Ambedkarresignedfromhis
cabinetpositionaslawminister.Thiswasin1951.Then,asthepopularnarrativegoes,Ambedkarturned,
ratherreturned,toBuddhismtoadvancehiscontinuingefforttoreformIndiansocietytowardssocialequality.
Ambedkarsabandoningofthestatereformprojectforsocialequalityconstitutesonedimensionofthe
paradoxwehavejustnoted.TheaccountgivenbySangharakshita,Ambedkarsbiographer,encapsulates
thisdilemma:

ThenewConstitutiongavegeneralsatisfactionandAmbedkarwaswarmlycongratulatedby
friendandfoealike.Neverhadhebeensopopular.ThepresshailedhimastheModern
Manu,andtheironyofthefactthatitwasanUntouchablewhohadgivenFreeIndiaits
Constitutionwaswidelycommentedupon.Thoughhelivedforsevenmoreyears,itwasas
theArchitectoftheConstitutionandtheModernManuthathewasdestinedtopassinto
officialhistory.Whenhisstatuecametobeerectedoutsidetheparliamentbuildingafterhis
deathitwasthereforeastheModernManuthathewasdepicted,holdingtheConstitution
underneathhisarmandpointinginthedirectionoftheparliamentbuilding.Butthoughby
1948Ambedkarhadachievedsomuch,andthoughtodayheismostwidelyrememberedas
theauthoroftheIndianConstitution,hisgreatestachievementwasinfactstilltocome.
Thisachievementwasanessentiallyspiritualone,anditcameonlyattheveryendofhislife,
whenhehadspentseveralyearsinthepoliticalwildernessafterfailingtosecurethepassage
oftheHinduCodeBill.TheBillrepresentedaputtingintoshapebyAmbedkarofwork
accomplishedduringthepreviousdecadebyanumberofeminentHindulawyersanddealt
withsuchmattersasmarriageanddivorce,adoption,jointfamilyproperty,womensproperty,
andsuccession.Thoughitwasareformingratherthanarevolutionarymeasure,theBillmet
withviolentoppositionbothinsideandoutsidetheAssembly,andevenwithintheCabinet.
AmbedkarwasaccusedoftryingtodestroyHinduismandtherewereangryexchangesonthe
Assemblyfloorbetweenhimandhisorthodoxopponents.IntheendtheBillwasdropped
afteronlyfourclauseshadbeenpassedandinSeptember1951,tiredanddisgusted,
AmbedkarresignedfromtheCabinet.Inhisresignationstatement(whichhewasprevented
frommakingintheAssemblyitself)heexplainedthathehadlefttheCabinetforfivereasons.
ThesecondofthesewasthatitwasapathetictotheupliftoftheScheduledCastes,thefifth
thatPanditNehruhadfailedtogiveadequatesupporttotheHinduCodeBill.

Ambedkarquitthecongressgovernment,andatthesubsequentLokSabhaelectionsof1952,contestedas
anindependentcandidateinBombay.Ambedkarlosttoarelativelyunknownopponent.Thefourremaining
yearsofhislife,AmbedkardevotedentirelytofightHinduismandprojectaprogramofsocialemancipation
ofIndiandalitsthroughtherejectionofHinduism.AsSangharakshitasbiographyofAmbedkarvividlyshows,
failinghealthdidnotpreventhimfrombeingonceagainenergeticallyengagedinbothsocioreligious
activismandintellectualwork.Thelastphaseofhislifeseemstohavebeenconsumedbyasingular
objective,thatis,advancingBuddhismasthereligious,moralandsocialalternativeavailableforhuman
emancipation.
FromConstitutionalEngineeringtoReworkingofBuddhism
WecanidentifytwoimportantandinterrelatedthemesthatdominatethestoryofAmbedkarduringtheyears
19511956:hisreconstructionofBuddhism,andhisdecisiontoconverttoBuddhism.
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/ambedkarslegacycritiqueofreligionquestforsocialjusticetheparadoxofconstitutionalism/

6/9

4/27/2016

AmbedkarsLegacy:CritiqueOfReligion,QuestForSocialJustice&TheParadoxOfConstitutionalism|ColomboTelegraph

AnanyaVajpeyiinherbookRighteousRepublic(2012)hasexaminedsomewhatextensivelythequestionof
whyAmbedkarbecameaBuddhist,aquestionthathasnotbeenadequatelyandcriticallyreflectedoninthe
vastliteratureonAmbedkar.Vajpeyicitesthreereasons.ThefirstistheoneexpoundedbyAmbedkar
himself.ItisderivedfromhisowntheoryabouttheIndianuntouchablecommunities,aselaboratedinhis
bookTheUntouchables:AThesisontheOriginofUntouchability,publishedin1948.Ambedkarscontention
wasthattheUntouchablesintheHinducasteorderwereinfactnoneotherthanformerBuddhists.
Therefore,formoderndayUntouchables,tobecomeBuddhistsmeantthattheywouldbemakingareturn
toBuddhismandnotafreshentrytoareligionwithwhichtheyhadnopriorhistoricalcontact(Vajpey,2012:
213).Inthissense,theembracingofBuddhismbytheUntouchableswasnotaconversion,butessentiallya
return.
Thesecondreason,whichAnanyaVajpeyextrapolatesfromAmbedkarsownwritingsonBuddhism,
particularlytheBuddhaandHisDhammaishisunderstandingoftheprimacyofdukkhaintheBuddhas
teaching.ThethirdreasonisthisrejectionofotherreligionsChristianity,Islam,andSikhismasalternatives
toHinduism.
ThesecondreasonofAmbedkarsconversiontoBuddhism,assuggestedbyVajpeyi,warrantssomein
depthreflection.WhenonereadsAmbedkarstext,onegetstheimpressionthatAmbedkarhasbeen
workingonanewBuddhistmoralandsocialethicsforquitesometimeinawaythatwouldbearemakingof
Buddhismentirelyfromtheperspectiveofthesociallydowntrodden.Itisquiteanintellectualironythat
BuddhismwhichhasalsobeenseenasareligionofsocialequalitywasfoundedbyamemberofIndias
khastriyacommunity,twentysixcenturiesago.Similarly,Marxism,themostradicalseculardoctrine
committedtosocialequalityandemancipation,wasfoundedbyanintellectualofeliteclassbackground.
AmbedkarsisthefirstsocialemancipatoryreinterpretationofBuddhisminitsentirehistoryoftwentysix
centuries.OnecanevengototheextentofsayingthatalltraditionsofBuddhisthermeneuticsfocusedon
dukkhasufferinginitsindividualisticconstruction.InAmbedkarsreinterpretation,itisnotsurprisingthat
heforegroundedtheBuddhistconceptofdukkha,notjustasindividualsufferingasithasbeeninthe
tradition,butasAnanyaVajpeyishowsthisisanimportantpointassocialsuffering.Ambedkarsradical
Buddhisthermeneuticsrejectedtheconventionaltheorizingofdukkhasufferingwithintheframeworkof
FourNobleTruthschathuraryasathya.VajpeyimakestheassertionthatAmbedkarreinterpretedthe
conceptofdukkha,

notasindividual,karmicsuffering,butascollective,socialsuffering.Inotherwords,in
underminingtheFourNobleTruths,whatAmbedkarchallengedwasthenotionthatall
personsofwhatevercaste,class,orgender,needtofaceandtranscendtheirsuffering
rather,accordingtohim,sufferinghastobeseenassociallyconstitutedandhistorically
specific,andcouldbeconqueredonlyviacreedthatplacedsufferingattheverycenterofits
entireethicalarchitecture.Thus,evenaftermovingtheFourNobleTruthstooneside,itwas
BuddhismthatwouldbestdelivertheUntouchablesasagroupfromtheirveryspecific
dukkha,whichwasdiscriminationanddenigrationatthehandsofcasteHindus.(Vajpeyi,
2012:214)

Althoughnotwelldeveloped,AmbedkarscritiqueofBuddhistdoctrineofFourNobleTruthsshowedhis
discomfortwithwhathesawastheindividualistic,differenttosocial,theorizingofsuffering.Hesawthefour
AryanTruths,ashecalledthem,asconstitutingaproblem,apuzzletononBuddhists.HewroteinBuddha
andHisDhamma:
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/ambedkarslegacycritiqueofreligionquestforsocialjusticetheparadoxofconstitutionalism/

7/9

4/27/2016

AmbedkarsLegacy:CritiqueOfReligion,QuestForSocialJustice&TheParadoxOfConstitutionalism|ColomboTelegraph

Dothey[theFourAryanTruths]formpartoftheoriginalteachingsoftheBuddha?This
formulacutsattherootofBuddhism.Iflifeissorrow,deathissorrowandrebirthissorrow,
thenthereisanendofeverything.Neitherreligionnorphilosophycanhelpamantoachieve
happinessintheworld.Ifthereisnoescapefromsorrow,thenwhatcanreligiondo,whatcan
Buddhadotorelievemanfromsuchsorrowwhichiseverthereinbirthitself?ThefourAryan
TruthsareagreatstumblingblockinthewayofnonBuddhistsacceptingthegospelof
Buddhism.ForthefourAryanTruthsdenyhopetoman.ThefourAryanTruthsmakethe
gospeloftheBuddhaagospelofpessimism.Dotheyformpartoftheoriginalgospelorare
theyalateraccretionbythemonks?(inSelectedWorks,154).

WemaybetemptedtospeculateatthispointthatAmbedkarscritiqueofthedoctrinesofFourNobleTruths
aswellasKarmamayhavebeeninfluencedbyMarxism.Ambedkarseemstohaveaslightlydifferenttake
onMarxismandBuddhism.InBuddhaorMarx,aposthumouslypublishedessay,Ambedkarattemptedto
respondtoIndianMarxistswhoviewedMarxismandBuddhismastwoincompatibledoctrines.Twopositions
heassertedinthisessayareworthnoting:(a)IftheMarxistskeptbacktheirprejudicesandstudiedthe
Buddhaandstudieswhathestoodfor,theywouldchangetheirattitudetoBuddhism.Theywouldalso
realizethatthereissomethingintheBuddhasteachingswhichisworththeirwhiletotakenoteof.(b)
Althoughcommunists,asexemplifiedintheRussianrevolution,couldgivehumankindequality,itfailedto
givefraternityandliberty.Equalitywillbeofnovaluewithoutfraternityorliberty.Itseemsthatthethreecan
coexistonlyifonefollowsthewayoftheBuddha.Communismcangiveonebutnotall.
Asweallcaneasilymaketheclaimnow,theconversionofHarijanstoBuddhismdidnotresolvethequestion
ofinegalitarianinsimanddiscriminationsufferedbythem.DoesitmeanthatAmbedkarseffortsforan
egalitariansocietyhavegonetotallyunrewarded?ItisobviouslynotcorrecttosaythatAmbedkarhadany
utopianexpectationsfromhisprojectofdalitcommunitiesembracingBuddhism.Theconversionprogramme
hadamuchmoresignificantgoalandconsequence,asnotedbyAnanayaVajpeyi.Itgavethedalit
communitiesadistinctgroupidentitythatcanbeframedinreligious,moralandlegaltermsoutsidethe
ontologicalframeworksdefinedbytheHindutextsandpractices.HewantedtheUntouchablesto
reconstitutethemselvesasareligiouscommunity,withareligionsomeofthekeytenetsofwhichbeingre
interpreted.ThiscomponentofAmbedkarsprojectdoesnotseemtohavetakenforwardbyanyofhis
successors.ItisprobablythecasethattheradicalhermeneuticsofAmbedkarsneoBuddhismnavayana
hasnotprogressedmuchsincehisdeath
Meanwhile,postAmbedkarIndiaisalsoapostNehruIndia.Ithasalsobecomeapostliberal,post
democraticIndia,asmuchastherestofSouthAsiaactuallyis.Meanwhile,casteasasocial,cultural,
ideologicalandpoliticalphenomenoninIndiaseemstohaveacquiredacontinuing,powerfuland
regenerativedynamicofreproduction,revitalizationandresurgenceunderconditionsofelectoraldemocracy,
federalism,decentralization,policiesofpositivediscriminationandaffirmativeactionandofcoursethe
unevenpenetrationofcapitalism,particularlyintheruralcountryside.ContrarytowhatAmbedkarhas
envisaged,hisownpoliciesofpositivediscriminationandaffirmativeactionhasenabledthemarginalized
casteandethniccommunitiesinpostcolonialIndiatoproducetheirownlocalizedpoliticalelites.Theseelites
havebeeneffectivelymakinguseoftheirstatusofoppressionasaresourcefordemocraticandelectoral
mobilizationaswellassocialprotests,andalsoasasharpweaponoftheweak.IftheAmbedkarslegacy
weretohaveanysignificantcontemporaryappeal,thestruggleforequalityshouldonceagainbecomea
weaponoftheweakinIndiafortheemancipationoftheweak.
Inthistalk,IbrieflyreferredtotherecentincidentsattheHyderabadUniversityandtheJNUinvolvingyoung
dalitscholarsandtheIndianstate.Thisconfrontationshowsamongotherthingsthatthereareemerging
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/ambedkarslegacycritiqueofreligionquestforsocialjusticetheparadoxofconstitutionalism/

8/9

4/27/2016

AmbedkarsLegacy:CritiqueOfReligion,QuestForSocialJustice&TheParadoxOfConstitutionalism|ColomboTelegraph

signsofandpossibilitiesforanewradicalizationofdalitpolitics,quiteindependentoftheestablishedpolitical
partiesaswellasdalitpoliticaleliteswhohavebecomeevenpoliticalmanagersofstategovernments.The
kindofangerthattheseyoungstudentsdemonstratehighlightsonethemethatcontinuestomissthe
attentionofthemediahumiliationthatdalitscontinuetosufferasindividualsaswellasasocialgroup.
AmbedkarswritingsthatareharshlycriticalofHinduismandcasteHindueliteshaveconstantlyhighlighted
theexperienceofhumiliationofdalits.Thisisarealitythatnondalitleaders,evenGandhi,havenotbeen
abletocomprehend,because,phenomenologicallycaste,ethnic,genderetc.humiliationisnotsomething
thateverybody,includingtheuppercastemembersoftheCommunistPartyofIndia,experienceinequal
personalintensity.Onehastobeavictimofhierarchiestoexperiencesocialhumiliationfully,asAmbedkar
aswellasyoungRohithVemulaandKanniahKumarhavetolduswithgreatpassion.
Letmeconcludethistalkbysummarizingthemainthrustofmypresentation.AmbedkarslegacyinIndia
doesnotseemtobeundercontestationanylonger.Rather,dominantaswellasdalitpoliticalelitesare
competingtoinheritit,claimitanddomesticateit.Electoralmobilizationandexpansionaswellasweakening
ofdemocraticpoliticallifeinIndiansocietyrepeatedlyhighlightstherelevanceaswellaslimitsoftheagenda
forsocialtransformationthatAmbedkaradvancedsinglehandedlyfordecades.Meanwhile,themovement
forequalityandjusticeforthedalitmassesinIndiathroughpolitical,constitutionalandreligiosocialreforms
seemtohavelostitsedge.Theemergenceofnewpoliticalandintellectualclassesfromamongthedalit
eliteshasshiftedtheagendaforsocialjusticealongnewdirections.TheprojectofIndiasdalitemancipation
seemstohavereachedadeadlockasreflectedinanewpoliticalconsciousnessinwhichcritiqueisseenby
theseelitesasnegativepolitics.Meanwhile,therearealsosignsthatpostAmbedkardalitpoliticsinIndia
mayenteranewphaseofdirectconfrontationinasortofreturntoreclaimingAmbedkarslegacy.However,
theseneweffortstoreturntoAmbedkarslegacymightbehandicappedbytheabsenceofanewegalitarian
emancipatoryhermeneuticthatcancapturetheimaginationofdalitmassesonceagain.
Bibliography
Ambedkar,B.R.TheBuddhaandHisDhamma,inSelectedWorksofDr.Br.Ambedkar,pp.147574,
http://drambedkarbooks.wordpress.com.
1936,AnnihilationofCaste,inSelectedWorksofDr.B.R.Ambedkar,pp.71146,
http://drambedkarbooks.wordpress.com.
1948,TheUntouchables:WhoweretheyandWhytheyBecameUntouchables,inSelectedWorksof
Dr.B.R.Ambedkar,http://drambedkarbooks.wordpress.com.
BuddhaorKarlMarx,SelectedWorksofDr.B.R.Ambedkar,pp.576597.
Parekh,Bhikhu,2009,FirstAmbedkarMemorialLecture,LordBhikhuParekh,28May,2009,youtube.com.
Sangharakshita,1986,AmbedkarandBuddhism,London:WindhorsePublications.
Vajpeyi,Ananya,2012,RighteousRepublic:ThePoliticalFoundationsofModernIndia,Cambridge,MA:
HarvardUniversityPress.
*TextofthetalkdeliveredonApril22,2016attheIndianCulturalCentre,Colomboontheoccasion
ofB.R.AmbedkarCommemoration

https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/ambedkarslegacycritiqueofreligionquestforsocialjusticetheparadoxofconstitutionalism/

9/9