How does the living dialogue become a religious issue or a theological issue? It is because a breakdown of this dialogue results in the spread of demoralization within society. Ambedkar’s work is a great study of the colossal effects or the tremendous ill effects that flow from the absence of a living dialogue within a given society.
Ambedkar saw the widespread poverty in India as linked to the lack of a spiritual framework capable of generating enthusiasm among the people to attempt to better themselves. Thus, like Hayek, who saw the possibility of a movement within society as a necessary component of its life and growth [23] Ambedkar saw that the presence of enthusiasm in the population as a necessary condition of growth, including economic growth. Ambedkar attributed the reason for the lack of enthusiasm as the realization that the possibilities for movement within society did not in fact exist. The caste system of India was in fact a system that outlawed such movement. It was not just a question of lack of opportunity that the caste system had created but the lack of any possibility for hope. The ideologies of inequality and injustice leave no room for the development of enthusiasm, [ 24] he said. He demonstrated this view with an example. “As soon as a Brahmin women conceives, she thinks of the High Court whether any post of Judge has fallen vacant but when a Dalit woman becomes pregnant she cannot think of any thing better than a sweeper’s post under the municipal committee.” [25]
He spoke of such lack of enthusiasm as a disease.
“Now, what saps the enthusiasm in man? If there is no enthusiasm, life becomes a drudgery- a mere burden to be dragged. Nothing can be achieved if there is no enthusiasm. Why does one lose enthusiasm? Main reason for this lack of enthusiasm on the part of a man is that an individual loses hope to get an opportunity to elevate oneself. Hopelessness leads to lack of enthusiasm. The mind in such cases becomes diseased.” [ 26]
In fact, in all his writings and work, Ambedkar treated Indian society as a diseased society (he often used the word sick), due to thousands of years of the practice of the caste system.
This astute politician who held the Law Minister’s post in Nehru’s Cabinet and contributed a great deal to the discussion of all vital political issues of his time did not hesitate to state that India’s loss of freedom time and again which resulted in India being subject to foreign domination was caused by this diseased condition of the Indian mind, and due to the operation of the caste system:
“It is because our country as a whole never stood against the enemy. It was always a small section of the society and whoever over-powered it became the victor. This was mainly due to the pernicious caste system of the Hindus.” [27]
This analysis differs greatly from the analysis of many nationalists in India, and outside of the causes of the paralysis of the Indian mind. No one really argues seriously that there is no such paralysis. The differences of opinion relate to the reasons causing this paralysis. The nationalists argue that the paralysis was due to foreign invasion and foreign domination. Ambedkar’s position is that the foreign domination itself became possible due to the deep division among the people who are humanly divided, without any hope of coming together. There was no source to draw from when fighting a foreign element. Caste, notionally accepted as the foundation of society nullified the possibility of a common front to fight against outsiders’ invasions and domination.
The invaders once in power used this deep internal division to maintain their power and to exploit India’s resources. The group that had the natural leadership of the country was the Brahmins and they could not call the low castes to a common fight. Any physical act of solidarity would require holding common meetings and discourses. However, such physical contact would pollute the higher caste and make them impure. How could any strategy be developed or carried out without physical contact? Castes distanced groups of people physically. In this, caste was worse than slavery. [28] The slaves often lived in the houses of their masters and helped in the household work. Slaves were sometimes even allowed to get some education, so that they could be more useful to the master. This is not so within the caste system. Low caste persons were to be kept in their low positions and not allowed to participate in any social activity. The low castes had to be avoided and not be touched in any way. That is how the terms such as touchable and untouchable came into use.
Ambedkar demonstrated the depth of this physical aspect of caste:
“I would like to tell you some of the reminiscence of my childhood. There was a Maratha women employed in my school. She was herself quite illiterate but observed untouchability and avoided touching me. One day, I remember, I was very thirsty. I was not allowed to touch the water tap. I told my master that I wanted to drink water. He called the peon and asked him to turn on the tap and I drank water. Whenever the peon was absent I had to go without water. Thirsty, I had to return home and then only I could quench my thirst.” [29]
Ambedkar thus provided a tremendous study of how a society and the individuals within it go through a fundamental metamorphosis when it become organically incapable of what Grundtvig
would have called a living dialogue. Ambedkar did not see caste as the only source from which such a negative change can take place; The same result can happen when the concentration in society is making wealth or getting enriched.
He wrote:
“You know the proprietors of mills. They appoint managers in the mills who extract work from labour. The proprietors remain so much engrossed in their work that they have little time to develop their minds. While they accumulate wealth and become economic giants they remain mental dwarfs.” [30] Perhaps this aspect may apply to the situation of the West in present times. Perhaps, the West too needs to wake up from decadence of this type and address its own spiritual crisis.”
It is also a well known fact of the contemporary situation in most Third World countries that the impact of international relationships combined with internal factors have created a situation of destitution, which in turn has increased demoralization within many societies. Such demoralization often leads to internal warfare or ethnic, tribal and local conflicts. In fact, the area of conflict has now shifted from the international arena to local theaters of horror. Can these be resolved purely by physical rebuilding only? Are not the issues relating to internal inspiration irrelevant, when objective conditions prevent internal communication?
The related matter is about debt renunciation. Should not the first world countries consult their own internal sources of inspiration when considering these matters? Are policies that are followed on these matters based on the traditions of enlightenment of their countries or are they based on narrow considerations unworthy of great peoples? Should these matters be left purely to bureaucrats or must they become matters of living dialogue based on the inspirational sources of the Western traditions? Grundtvig’s writings on the issues relating to neighbouring countries of his time showed enlightened views. [31] He often opposed actions which would lead to loss of freedom or enslavement of peoples. Such deprivation of freedom and enslavement contradicted the Christian “Anskuelse.” If the Economic policies pursued by the West create conditions of deep poverty and demoralization among the Third World countries is that not a matter of fundamental importance to the peoples of First World Countries?
It is in this context that Grundtvig’s theology of the human as the precondition for the Christian needs to be looked at. Hinduism has created a conception of gods and a conception of holy life at the cost of destroying the human foundation of their society. This destruction was not only seen as irrelevant but also as necessary for Brahmins to achieve oneness with god. It was a conception of holiness and perfection which demanded deprivation of the humanity of most of the human beings living in Indian society.
It was the inhumanity that was implied in adherence to caste that made Ambedkar look for outside inspiration. This he found in Buddhism. Buddha, Ambedhar said, was the only person who had the courage not only to condemn caste but also to espouse a promote new religious principles on the basis of the common humanity of everyone. Ambedkar wrote “The fundamental principle of Buddhism is equality. Of all Bhikkhus who joined the order in the time of Lord Buddha, about 75% of the Bhikkus belonged to the Brahmin caste and the remaining 25% were Shudra. Even then Buddhism was called the religion of the Shudra.”
Here Ambedkar quotes from Buddha..
“O Bhikkhus, you belong to different castes and have come from various lands. Just as the great
rivers when they have fallen into the great ocean lose their identity, just so brethren, O, brethren, do these four castes, Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, Shudra when they begin to follow the doctrine and discipline as propounded by the Tathagatta, they renounce different names of castes and rank and become members of one and same society.” [32]
To have a common identity it was necessary to lose caste identity, which was an identity based on the superiority of some and the inferiority of others. Ambedkar’s attempt to rediscover a basis to end the disease of the Indian mind led him to Buddhism which was once a powerful tradition in India. Grundtvig found the source of inspiration for democratic ideals in a reinterpretation of the local Lutheran tradition and bringing in the radical idea that the human, or the folk life was the precondition for spirituality. If the precondition was absent, the other had no ground to grow. Ambedkar was pointing to an historical example where the precondition had been killed. His was an attempt to indicate a way to re-create a similar precondition.
Grundtvig’s conceptions about Nordic mythology and Christian “Anskuelse” [33] may be compared with Ambedkar’s views on the original tradition of Buddhism as a source of inspiration.
In describing the work on Buddhism he said, “We have started this movement to develop and educate our minds.” [ 34]
Explaining the need for religion among the poor as a need arising for hope, Ambedkar referred to a German professor of his, Professor Winternitz.
“The Watergang Rabelan Depth, was the book which he recommended and by which I was much inspired. ‘It is only the poor, he said who need religion.’ Hope is the spring of action in life. Religion affords hope. Therefore, mankind finds solace in the religion, and that is why the poor cling to religion.”
Here it must be noted that Buddhism is not a religion but the reference here is to Dhamma. The term poor is more to the term ordinary people used by Grundtvig and religion more to “Anskuelse,” used by Grundtvig.
To those who had not turned to Buddhism, but remained within Hinduism but wanted Hinduism to change, Ambedkar made the following suggestion:
“You must give a new doctrinal basis to your Religion-a basis that will be in consonance with Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, in short, with Democracy.”
Though he said this to a group of Hindus who considered themselves to be enlightened and wanted a fundamental change, he himself did not seem to have believed in this option. A few months before this meeting he had announced that though he was born a Hindu he would not die a Hindu. In this very text of the prepared speech- Annilation of Caste- for this meeting where the above mentioned words were to be spoken, he mentioned, “I shall not be in your fold for long.” He spent the subsequent 20 years, the last years of his life, in a very extensive historical studies of India’s past and preparing his people to look in a different direction for inspiration. [ 35]
[23] A. Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty, University of ChicagoPress, Chicago [back to text]
[24] One Eve of Great Conversion- a Speech explaining his Conversion to Buddhism-the date of the speech is15 October,1956-Reproduced in Thus Spoke Ambdekar- Vol.2 Edited by Bhagwan Das [back to text]
[25] ibid [back to text]
[26] ibid [back to text]
[27] ibid [back to text]
[28] Ambedkar -Dr. Babashaheb Ambedkar Writing and Speeches Volume 5 [back to text]
[29] ibid [back to text]
[30] ibid [back to text]
[31] Tradition and Renewal- Edited by Christian Thodberg and Anders Pontoppidan Thyssen, published by Det danske Selskab- The Danish Institute [back to text]
[32] Buddha and his Damma [back to text]
[33] Selected Writings – N.F.S. Grundtvig Edited by Johannes Knudsen,pgs-22-26 [back to text]
[34] ibid [back to text]
[35] B.R. Ambedkar, Annihilation of Caste, 1937 [back to text]
