Gandhi-Ambedkar interface

- Gandhi & Ambedkar’s ideologies clashed, political interests clashed ~ a result of their
personalities + political positioning
- Ambedkar began career as ~ political leader & authentic representative of the untouchables;
Gandhi ~ denied existence of separate interest of untouchables in context of freedom
struggle

Caste Question
- Ambedkar ~
- untouchability an expression of the caste system, hence studied the Hindu scriptures it was
vindicated by
- removal of untouchability a small part of the anti-caste movement
- larger goal = Annihilation of Caste
- occupies a place of urgency in his thought
- Gandhi ~
- wanted abolition of caste-based discrimination & didn’t observe caste in personal conduct
- more emphasis on untouchability — than on caste question; did not occupy a place of
urgency in his thought
- for him, untouchability core of the caste system; when it ends, caste system will end
• if that is so, why internal di erentiation-hierarchy among touchable castes
- removal of untouchability will be = removal of caste-consciousness
- hence, ultimate goal was indeed abolition of caste; but didn’t occupy a prominent position
in his overall thought
- supported temple-entry movements + observed fasts to convince people of evil of
untouchability —BUT— didn’t let it occupy prominent position in his thought + didn’t
extend satyagraha to caste-based inequality

- Gandhi believed ~ the responsibility of doing away w/ untouchability rested w/ caste-Hindus

- Ambedkar believed ~ Satyagraha not an e ective enough tool to perturb caste-Hindus who
— believe religious sanction to caste-system + get material advantage from it
- Gandhian thought ~ doesn’t direct intellectual-political energies against caste-system &
those bene ting from it —RATHER— searches for possible areas of cooperation-integration
- his approach ~ passive, not active in this respect + no deep analysis
fi
ff
ff
 - the fact that Gandhi was appealing to caste-Hindus not to discriminate against untouchables
shows —
- awareness that one group being treated wrongly by another + division of society along
these lines, yet —
- did not allow separate political identity through separate electorates + neglected
development of satyagraha as a tool against untouchability & caste-inequalities

- Gandhi refused to recognise that caste-based divisions could be used as categories to

understand structural injustice in Hindu society
- Ambedkar recognised divisions b/w caste-Hindus (savarna) & untouchables, tribals,
aborigines (avarna)
• while Gandhi would accept the empirical reality of caste, he was not prepared to posit the
ideological & political basis of anti-caste struggle; did not occupy a prominent position in his
thought

Bane of Capitalism
- Gandhi realised ~ malady of the west lay in its modern production process, which led to,
- commodi cation & consequent degradation of human character
- transformation of humans - from producers to consumers - main step in degradation of
society
- hence, rather than focusing on creating an anti-west nationalism stance, he focused on,
- modern lifestyle & arti cial generation of false materiality
- even though no direct attack on capitalism, his analysis of modern civilisation indicts it ~
exploitative nature of modern production + dehumanising e ects of consumerism
- his philosophy of ~ simple life, abnegation of wants, swadeshi
— in direct con ict w/ —
- materialism & instrumental interdependence of ~ capitalism

- now, for most of his political career ~ Ambedkar did not employ economic dimensions in his
political agenda + his early work on economics conforms to the prevalent economic wisdom
at the time
- his main concern was to understand ~ sociologically, the operation of the caste-system +
socio-religious justi cations for the same
- his political struggles focused on ~ social, cultural, political, religious aspects of caste

- his writings in economics show vacillation

fi
fi
fi
fl
ff
 - not persuaded by communist economics + wary of any system which glori ed/resembled
the ‘old order’
- hence, averse to ~ autonomous village communities, small industry, mutual dependence
etc ~ which could further caste interests
- noted the political fallout of the capitalistic economy, viz, sham democracy + ready to
surrender it for a more egalitarian form of production
- aware of threat to liberty-equality-fraternity from capitalism as from brahmanism
• All in all, his preoccupation & focus on the caste question put economic considerations to the
background + showing no support for radical economic policies

Perspective on Tradition
- Gandhi ~
- tries to nd element of truth in tradition, emphasise it
- gives an impression that asking for nothing ‘new’, just continuation-harnessing of old
tradition
- used traditional symbols associated w/ truth & justice to mobilise the masses
- interprets & attaches new meaning to tradition & symbols
- in this way, develops his own normative framework on basis of tradition

- Ambedkar ~
- injustice based on caste legitimised by tradition; hence in tradition, the ideology of
exploitation
- since Hindu tradition ~ based on brahmanical interests + legitimises caste as a moral code
—> critical of it
- yet, not rejecting all tradition ~ just tradition of - Brahmanism + Vedic Ideology
- complained of lack of emancipatory space in the traditional framework

- Gandhi ‘appropriated’ tradition in order to save it from chauvinism; but such appropriation
requires strong critique as ~
- tradition may give credence to systems of exploitation + supporters of inequality nd
comfort under its aegis
THUS, appropriation of tradition and employing it for purposes of building a just society —>
requires a strong will to reject large parts of tradition + situating tradition in a di erent context
from the one historically associated with it
- Ambedkar provided this ‘strong criticism’
fi
fi
ff
fi
Meeting Ground
both strived to visualise a community based on Justice & Fraternity
- Gandhi ~
- elements of community in ~ love, non-violence, dignity of human life & labour, non-
exploitative process of production
- in this light critiques modernity, colonialism, capitalism
- Ambedkar ~
- his discourse unfolds in a di erent manner w/ a critique of Hindu social order, religion &
society
- situated this critique on the solid basis of a communitarian vision
both believed social transformation only possible through social action — in the form of
political struggles — democratic in nature
both respect the materiality of human life — ful lment of basic needs + enriched material
life
both believe moral values to be essential to regulate social life —HENCE— shared a common
conception of ‘secular religion’ which is :-
- based in morality, truth, love, compassion —not— rituals, existence of god, heaven-hell etc.
- religious scriptures should be interpreted, understood -in light of- conscience & morality
- not as conceived by priestly authorities
- wherever scripture & morals clash, religion backs morality
- Gandhi’s Sanatan Dharma & Ambedkar’s Dhamma ~ moral frameworks for social action
Gandhi’s rejection of religious authority behind untouchability, views on intercaste-marriage,
non-orthodox interpretation of varna —> can be construed as caste question being a primary
concern in Gandhian discourse
Ambedkar’s non-disputation of exploitative nature of capitalism, espousal of socialism &
rejection of concentration of wealth, distinction b/w material well-being & greed, lust —> can
be construed as critiques of modernistic lifestyle
both concerned w/ question of emancipation
ff
fi