In Conversation With Mr Bhagwan Das

                        In Conversation With Mr Bhagwan Das
                        By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

                    

                        02 October, 2007
                        Countercurrents.org

Mr Bhagwan Das is one of the most reputed scholar on Ambedkarism and the issue of Human Rights of Scheduled Castes. Widely traveled, Mr Bhagwan Das has spoken at various national & international platforms on the conditions of Dalits in India and what is the best way of their emancipation. In freewheeling conversation with Vidya Bhushan Rawat, he speaks of the state of Dalit movement as well as political parties in India.
Please tell us about your childhood. Being son of a sweeper, what hurdles and obstacles you were faced with and how did your father react to them?
My childhood was different. My father came from a well off family. After the death of his father, differences occurred in the family and he came to live near Simla. He was not educated, as he could not go to school. My father worked as a sweeper in the post office. He had a house of his own and saved money regularly. He loved reading and had deep interest in Ayurveda. He took special care to educate my sister and me. A Maulvi was kept to teach us. So it was different unlike other untouchable families of that time where education was not considered important. He was financially well off and spent most of the time with his books.
In my native village untouchability was practiced in turning on the taps. The barber did not cut my hair; we could not enter a temple. We had to ask Hindu boys to give us water whenever we had to drink it but since my family was well off, we did not face any difficulty in this regard.

How did you come in touch with Dr Ambedkar?
Dr Ambedkar, then a labor minister visited Simla. I had read about Ambedkar particularly while reading Urdu newspapers. He was our harbinger of Hope. We did not know anything about him except an anti Ambedkar campaign in Congress paper which was the same as in Hindu papers. The only exception I found was in Hindi newspaper Kranti by Sant Ram BA.of Jaat Paat Todak Mandal.
I went to meet him for the first time and I waited for him for three hours because I was first a boy, all the people holding important position came and went away. At 7 pm I was taken inside his house. He looked at my face. I did not go to ask for anything from him but he said, ' What do you want?' " I do not want anything, as I was already employed", I said. I told him about my family and about my application. In 15 days, I got a letter of appointment. This time my boss was a Muslim. It was surprising as I found that most of the Muslims were terribly against me. Some of the Hindus were very helpful and progressive. Some of them were South Indian Brahmins and I found them quite progressive but Matlab Hussain, my immediate boss, had some complaint against me as I was overburdened with my work. I used to work till 7.30 pm. Everybody tried to exploit me. I left that job and joined Indian Air Force. I did not want to join army but navy appealed to me.
I was again selected for further training in UK but I had to deposit Rs 5000/- which I could not do and left Air Force in 1946 and went back to my family in Simla. There I was working with Scheduled Castes Federation and I came across very progressive people belonging to the communist parties, and one very progressive in the party was Kameshwar pandit. There we read a lot of Marxist literature and also learnt about Chinese experiment. I read about Mao Tse Tung but who appealed to me was Liu Shaoqi.
We used to hold study circle meetings. I was staying at Seva Nagar, in New Delhi. It was a peon's house where I stayed for two years, as I could not afford a better one. Then I shifted to Lodi Colony with a friend who was an ex -communist. He was thrown out of the party. He had been a whole timer. He was very fond of reading, not just Marxist literature but general reading also. Later, I was allotted house in Sarojini Nagar.
Here, I came in touch with Mr Shiv Dayal Singh Chaursia, a backward caste person and a few others who were working with him in the movement. I used to spend time in Gandhi Peace Library. Chaurasia was to write a note of dissent in the Backward Classes Commission. He took me to Dr Ambedkar to show the note of dissent, which was actually drafted by me. Dr Ambedkar did not have a high opinion about that note. He asked him to leave the note for his comments but started putting questions about me. He had forgotten that he had met me earlier also. I spoke most of the time in English and offered to work for him. It was three days in a week for which he agreed. Some times, he wanted to information/abstract about certain books for which I used to go to Library. But after the work was over, I used to sit with Dr Ambedkar for 10 minutes and put my questions to him.
What would you discuss with Dr Ambedkar? What would he say to the issue of such as conversion as he was promoting a particular idea of embracing Buddhism? What actually was your position on it? Why should not we convert to any other faith of our choice? Unfortunately, caste system goes along with you even after conversion? What choices do we have to save us from the oppression and exploitation of caste system?
One of the questions was on Buddhism as he was always asking us to embrace Buddhism. I asked him that I could not enter a Buddha Vihar. How do you say Buddhism is better than any other religion? I have been to Burma, seen Tibetan Buddhism but have not come across anything worthwhile. Study is a different thing but as for as social practice is concerned, I do not find anything different in it."Dr. Ambedkar replied, 'all you said might be right.. Now onwards it would not happen again." I studied a lot of books on Buddhism and other books on religion particularly Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Sikhism, Kadianis etc, but Marxism and Buddhism attracted me the most. About Sikhism, I have a very poor opinion. I came close to them because I was teaching two children belonging to them. One of the student's father was a doctor, who used to invite me to Gurudwara. I used to go there. Once there was one festival on which they had a langer (community dinining) in the Gurudwara. One man asked the doctor; 'you are making us eat with the Churas and Chamars.' It was a shocking experience for me in the Gurudwara. After it I studied Sikhism and found that they had 10 Gurus, all belonged to the Khatri caste, none married outside their own parental caste and the fourth guru included teaching of Ravidas, Kabir and others in the Guru Granth Sahib but in practice Sikhism is no way different from Hinduism. If a convert comes from a Carpenter community, he is a Ramgarhia, if is he a convert from a Scavenger caste then he is a Mazhabi, if he is a convert from liquor seller caste then is an Ahaluwalia. Where has gone the caste system? It goes from the front door and comes back from the window. They never started a movement to condemn the caste system. After that incident, I never went to a Gurudwara.
I was still critical of Buddhism but felt that if Untouchables continue to follow the religion they have been following then there was no chance of their ever unifying. If Hinduism is preaching untouchability against these castes, these castes themselves practice untouchabiliity among themselves. Now for instance, if you go to a Chamar, he looks down upon a sweeper and if you go to a sweeper, especially in north India to those who call themselves Balmikis, they will never have anything with Helas, Doms and Mehtar. Balmiki movement started in 1930s and was mainly started by Arya Samajis because they (Bhangis) were converting to Christianity. One person Tetar was asking the Christians to convert them but the upper caste priests were not ready to convert them for the fear of losing the other people from the Church.
Upper castes converted to Christianity after 1857. There were Muslims, Hindus who became Christians. When the missionaries started converting the untouchables they too started going to the Church but holding the Holy Communion was a problem. The upper castes started their prayer meeting in the morning and the Untouchables were told to conduct their Church meetings in the afternoon. So Kashmiri Gate church had two services, one in the morning and the other in the evening for the Untouchables.
I also found that people who were converting to Buddhism were Buddhists just for the namesake. It is unique to India that even after leaving their religion and embracing an other they still stick to their castes. You cannot get rid of your caste. Unfortunately, a majority of those converted to Buddhism were Mahars hence Mangs were looked down upon by the Mahars and they did not bother about Chambhars.
What were your impressions about Baba Saheb Ambedkar when you first met him?
My father used to talk proudly about him. The first thing which impressed me very much when I first met him was his love for learning and the second thing his character which was immaculately clean.His worst enemies could not charge him on that front and the third his commitment to the cause of Untouchables. But when I was working with him in the Labor Ministry, I found his involvement in the development of this country. He sent six Scheduled Castes to UK who later held important positions in the Central Ministry. Besides the SCs, he was interested in the industrialization of the country after the British left.

A lot has been written about Ambedkar's conversion to Buddhism. Many Dalit intellectuals interpreted it as his anti Marx philosophy. Where does Ambedkar Stand on Marx?
He was not against Marx but against dogmatic people because the books written by Dange and other upper caste elite Marxists did not appeal to him. But he studied Marxism seriously and also the labor movement of UK. He was much interested in modernizing India and that is why he introduced this thing when he was labor minister. If you go through his speeches in Parliament, they indicate an inclination for progress and modern thinking and that is a common link between Nehru and Ambedkar.The writers have not highlighted this aspect of Dr. ambedkar, as they have not done independent research. They had much respect for each other. Ambedkar was not a great admirer of Nehru when he joined the government but when he had opportunity to interact with Nehru his opinion became very different.
What is your reaction to the state of Dalit Movement today? There are so many Republican parties as well as different caste based organizations. Then there is political philosophy of BAMCEF and BSP. What do you think is their future?
When Ambedkar entered the field he started Independent Labor Party and in that he had not only the Untouchable leaders but leaders from other communities also such as upper castes who joined the movement and the Party. In 1942 he felt that it was not enough so he formed Scheduled Castes Federation and it was exclusively for the Untouchables of India. After India's independence he felt that SCF was meaningless hence he started Republican Party of India and it was not a party exclusively for the SC people. He wanted to broaden the base and take up the economic issues for advancement of India but people who took over the leadership of RPI did not understand him and did not follow him. They wanted RPI for caste mobilization and hence it split on caste lines. Today there are so many wings of RPI that you do not even know.
You have been critical of BAMCEF? What were your basic differences with them?
BAMCEF is not a political party. It says it is a Backward, SC and Minority Employees' Federation. If it is an employees federation than it is not a political party. BAMCEF was actually started by some people in Poona. They say we are trying to raise the consciousness of the people but how can an organisation, which has no political ideology and progrmme do that. But even today, strictly speaking it is not a political party. It is still in utter confusion and now it has got spilt into three. And each speaking its own language and frankly speaking dominated by Chamar community in certain areas. In some areas of Vidharbha, it is dominated by the Mahars. It does not have an all India appeal because to organize SCs is not an easy job because they are divided into more than 800 castes. And there are castes and sub castes. Caste rivalry is there. Chamars are divided into more than 60 castes while Sweepers are divided into 12 castes. Valmikis are dominating the sweeper community but they cannot carry Dhanuks, Hellas, Doms and others with them.

So Dalit movement has become a movement of a few enlightened castes. When I started Ambedkar Mission movement, I asked in writing that one member of the family must marry outside his /her parental caste. That is the only way to show that you work against casteism. In my case, I have relationship with 6-7 communities including Malas, Dhanuks etc. If you do not do it then what is the use of saying that you want to break it?
What conversion has changed for the Dalits? One great Dalit cultural icon blamed conversion for taking away the revolutionary spirit from the community.
It is good to break away and bad to continue in the tradition that has subjugated you. It is also important to understand whether it takes away the revolutionary spirit or not. It is a lack of understanding. Look at this in this way, if you continue to be divided on caste lines you can never become a strong force. All Shudra castes are dividedand and atishudras are hopelessly divided because reservation gave opportunities only to those who are enlightened enough to make use of reservation and not others. In western UP, these were the Jatavs who were in business and educated people actually monopolized the jobs. What about others? In case they continue to remain in their communities/castes and not broaden their base, there is no hope. Secondly, here you are strengthening Hinduism, a religion which has exploited you.In ceremonies such as marriages, cremations, festivals, Mundans, you are following them and strengthening it. You are not strengthening yourself. In case the Dalits embrace other religion what will happen? They embraced Christianity but maintained caste. They embraced Islam and maintained caste because Islamic society is divided into three main castes :Ashraf, Ajlaf and Arjal. Ashrafs are Shaikhs, Sayyeds, Mughals and Pathans who came with invaders and they looked down upon Ajlaf who got converted here. And the third category people were the working class people; the lower castes and untouchables who converted to Islam and were termed as Arjals. the Butchers who were converted from Khatiq claim that they are Quraishis because they came from outside. Julaha is an untouchable caste but after conversion he claims himself as Ansari who came from Ansar. The fact remains that despite all claims of unity Muslim society remains divided into three castes and there are no inter marriages. Christianity, Islam and Sikhism have failed because they were sticking to the originality of religion, presence of God and a holy book, which is claimed to have been created by God.
If people continue to be divided on caste line then what is the future? Religion is of nominal or little value for the people. They stick to it mostly for political reasons, not because it gives them identity and history but majority of people who are forced into different religions, they use it only for marriages and burial. Nothing is wrong with it. Dr Ambedkar thought, we need a revolutionary change and for that religion has to be changed. It needs to be based on reason, compassion and brotherhood. He studied Buddhism and as Lord Buddha said towards the end of his life that there is no place for God. He wanted happiness of the people too. Unfortunately, the leaders of Buddhism were not able to carry that message. They maintained caste and at the same time call themselves as Buddhist.
What is the status of Dalit movement today?
Unfortunately, the movement never reached the agrarian communities. Dr Ambedkar chalked out a programme to reach 70% of our population, which lives in villages and was treated very badly by the dominant communities. If it is Marathas, Kunbis in Maharastra, it is Jaats and Gujjars in UP. He thought that Bengal is different. IN Bengal land went to Dalits because of land reforms. Unfortunately, the leadership of the movement came from the urban areas. Educated, semi educated people took over the leadership of the movement. The movement did not go beyond that. Some people tried to educate people in the villages but working in the villages is very different, because society there is horizontally and vertically divided and land holding community is the worst enemy. What Ambedkar did was that he gave a call to the people to migrate to the cities. So the people who could not face situation in the rural areas migrated to urban areas but the situation differs from state to state.
In southern states the situation is slightly better in the sense that land was owned by the Brahmins and they have been thrown out in South but in the North India the land was not owned by the Brahmins but by the other people. They are the middle communities and became Hinduised. The movement of rural landless people has not been initiated by RPI. They had it in their programme but it was never promoted because most of the leaders came from cities who were interested in winning reserved seats and used poor people for winning elections only.
Scavengers remain the lowest among the Dalits. How do you describe their condition today? What are the impediments in their development?
It is not a community itself. It is divided into 12-14 castes. But in South the division is not that bad. In Andhra, Madigas who are basically Chamars have seven castes among them working as scavengers. Hence the division is not that strict and harsh as in North India. Most of them are employed under the municipality, cantonment boards, and station staff offices. They have a long tradition of people exploiting them and promoted as Jamadars in their department. Inspite of the fact that it is a lowly paid occupation, people pay bribe to get jobs .Even in Delhi you have to pay bribe to get a job under MCD.
Unfortunately, efforts have not been made to unite the sweepers. Why? Because you take up the case of one particular area and you choose a leader from these quarters. Others are working in private quarters in Mohallas under the bridge system. In this system you work under several masters, get left over food, old cloths, food on marriage or any other festivals so it is not but several local masters.
If they unite then due to economic weakness, they do not remain so for long. That is why the sweepers and scavengers even today remain to be one of the poorest and backward communities. One reason is leadership, second is economic and third is your locality. And this job does not need hard work. It is definitely a dirty work and looked down upon by every body. These factors result in many problems, like drinking and wasteful expenditure. Hindusiation has weakened them as they imitate the Hindus. Efforts have not been made by different people and leaders to unite different castes and make them acquainted with the programmes of the government. Even the commissions have not been able to do that. Educationally, they are backward because their school drop out rate is very high. Efforts have not been made to spread education in these classes.
I have been associated with the movement from the age of 16. I have also been associated with labor movement. Unfortunately ambitious political people take benefit of ignorance and backwardness of these people. Right kind of people are now training the Dalits and giving leadership but unfortunately 'illiterate' people with little knowledge are stand in the way. I think there is hardly any organization free from these accusations- Congress, BJP and others.
I am happy with the new young people are writing about the movements. When I meet them in conferences and seminars, I feel there is a hope, though it is not easy. The population of right thinking people is showing an upward trend. Could you ever imagine that the sweepers of Punjab would hold mass conversion for Buddhism. New trends are coming up. New kind of leadership is coming up. Unfortunately they do not have the means to support them.
Political Power is the Master Key. What do you say to it?
Well, there was a time when Baba Saheb Ambedkar said that. When you speak to different kinds of audiences particularly political leaders, it makes sense. But you will also have to get rid of the weakness within the society. He also said about promotion of education. What is being done on that side? It is wrong to say that he laid emphasis on political power only. Political power without right kind of ideology means nothing. I think people are misquoting Ambedkar that political power is the master key. He might have been speaking at Scheduled Castes Federation and with political leaders. But why we do not talk about his other works. It is not enough.
Globalization has banged on our door. There are movements against it in various parts of India. Many of our friends have written positively on it suggesting that it would benefit the Dalits. What are ypur views on it ?
The government would have a different complexion, if we had 10% people in the civil services. Now with the judgment of the Supreme Court they are going to suffer more in the years to come. This globalization does not affect the weaker section at the moment. But under globalization, if the international movement on the issue of Dalits is properly handled, even in globalization they can have a share. Globalization has a political model and an economic model and it leads to empowerment but behind these ideas are people who want to solve their problems, find the market, create new market and create new classes. In western countries people are trying to create consciousness and awareness among the down trodden communities to develop leadership.
Dr Ambedkar was a truly humanist leader of our time but it ldifferent castes have made him look like as if he was a caste leader. How do you describe Ambedkar?
He was a rationalist in thinking with the interest of SCs in mind. He never considered British to be their friend. But he got an opportunity because British wanted to expand the executive council but they selected other progressive people also. I think he was the most capable and learned person among his contemporaries. He had economic programmers which he could implement through the Ministry of Labor which was then considered an orphan Ministry and through that he tried to promote industrialization of India and tried to create a class of technically trained people. No body had done that earlier.

Interview: Bhagwan Das on Dalit Religious Traditions and the Hindutva Challenge

Interview: Bhagwan Das on Dalit Religious Traditions and the Hindutva Challenge
Yoginder Sikand
ysikand@yahoo.com
Mon Feb 21 08:40:04 CST 2005

             

 

 (Bhagwan Das is a Delhi-based Dalit lawyer. Author of numerous books on Dalit history and Ambedkarism, he is associated with several Dalit organisations. In this interview with Yoginder Sikand he speaks about the religious traditions of the sweeper community to which he belongs and about the challenges to the Dalit movement from Hindutva, which he identifies as the contemporary face of Brahminism.)

Q: How did you get involved in the Dalit movement?

A: I was born in an Untouchable family in Himachal Pradesh. My father used to work as a sweeper in a post office. My mother was also from a sweeper family, but one which was semi-Muslim. I had the opportunity to meet Dr. Ambedkar on several occasions. I first met him in Bombay in 1943. After I joined the Air Force and got a posting in Bombay, I would regularly go to his house to meet him, three times a week. I would do the paper work that he would give me-making clippings from newspapers, typing, procuring information that he required from different offices and so on. So, that is how I began getting involved in the Dalit struggle. When Dr. Ambedkar converted to Buddhism in 1956, I followed in his footsteps and in 1957 and embraced Buddhism along with my family.

Q: Why did Dr. Ambedkar convert to Buddhism?

A: The Dalits have never been Hindus, because, being outcastes, they are outside the four-fold Hindu caste system. Buddhism, according to Dr. Ambedkar, was the original religion of the Dalits. It is a religion of freedom and liberation. Dr. Ambedkar believed, and rightly so, that all major social and political revolutions have been preceded by cultural and religious revolutions, and so for the Dalit struggle conversion was a fundamental necessity.

We Dalits have never been Hindus. Actually, we had our own religious systems quite distinct from Brahminical beliefs and practices. Take the case of my own community, the sweepers (Bhangis). Their status was ambiguous. They were neither Hindus nor Muslims. It was difficult to place us anywhere because we did not worship any Hindu gods and nor did we go to mosques to pray. We had our own folk heroes whom we worshipped, but this tradition is now fast being forgotten, because Hindu organisations are desperately trying to Hinduise us. We sweepers had our own patron saint called Lal Beg. Later, the Arya Samajists tried to convert us into Hindus by claiming that we were descendants of Valmiki, the author of the Ramayana, but I, for one, never accepted this myth

.
Q: Who was Lal Beg?

A: Some say that Lal Beg was actually Lal Bhikku, who could have been a Buddhist saint. If you read the prayers of the sweeper community of northern India which are dedicated to Lal Beg you get a very interesting picture. These prayers are called Kursi Namas. They were collected together by Youngson and published in The Indian Antiquaries. They read like the first book of the Genesis in the Old Testament, tracing the lineage of our heroes. The Kursi Namas very clearly tell us that the sweepers are neither Hindus nor Muslims. There is no mention of any Hindu gods like Rama or Krishna in them. But, very interestingly, the Kursi Namas all begin with the Qur’anic invocation Bismillah-ir-Rahman-ir-Rahim (‘In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate’), which is the standard Islamic form with which every verse of the Qur’an but one begins. And, they all end with the cry, which again is very Islamic, of ‘Bolo Momino Vohi Ek Hai!’ [Say, O believers, that He alone is
the One True Being!].

Now, at several places in the Kursi Namas, the names Lal Beg and Bala Shah are used interchangeably. Bala Shah was a leading Punjabi Sufi saint. The Punjabi Sufi Waris Shah writes in his Heer, which is really an encyclopedia of the Punjab of his times, that Bala Shah was the Pir or Sufi preceptor of two so-called low castes, the sweepers or Chuhras and the Pasis [Bala Pir Ai Churiyan Pasiyan Da].

Q: Are the sweepers still aware of this tradition?

A: Unfortunately, very few are, and this tradition is fast disappearing. One reason is because Hindu organisations have been sparing no effort to absorb the sweepers into the Hindu fold so as to increase Hindu numbers. They were afraid that otherwise the sweepers would all convert to Christianity, a process that began in 1873 and continued right until 1931. So, they used all means to prevent the conversion of the sweepers. As part of this broader agenda, they started selling the story that the sweepers are actually Valmikis, descendants of Valmiki, the author of the Ramayana. In order to convince the sweepers of their claims, they argued that Bala Shah, the other name for Lal Beg, was actually just a corrupted form of the name Valmiki.

 
O: But how could that be, considering that in the Ramayana Valmiki legitimises the caste system? He tells us that Rama beheaded the Shudra Shambukh simply because he was meditating in order to ascend to the heavens in his physical body?

A: Exactly, so it is just a myth. The problem with this so-called Valmiki connection is: which Valmiki are they talking about? The Brahminical Valmiki who is a Brahmin and claims to be the tenth son of Varuna? Or the Valmiki mentioned in the Puranas as a dacoit? The Valmiki who wrote the Ramayana champions the caste system, so how could he have been a sweeper? He was actually a Brahmin. The problem with the alleged connection between this Valmiki and the sweepers is that at least when the Chamars claim Ravidas there's a link between the two, and so is the case with the claims of the Julahas and Bunkars [weavers] vis-a-vis Kabir, but there is absolutely nothing to link the Valmiki of the Ramayana with the sweepers.

Q: Has the attempted Sanskritisation of the sweepers by taking recourse to this mythical connection between them and Valmiki actually succeeded in improving their social status?

A: No, not at all. I would not call this process Sanskritisation. Rather, it was a cheap imitation of certain Brahminical customs and rituals. Sanskritisation does not result in any social mobility for the sweepers. The trouble with caste is that if you try to throw it out from the front door, it creeps back again through the window or the back door. This has been the fate of conversion movements among the Dalits to Christianity, Sikhism and Islam as well, although these religions, in theory, are egalitarian, unlike Hinduism. As I see it, what is called Sanskritisation may result in some superficial changes of customs and names, but it does not result in any change in the attitudes of the so-called ‘upper’ castes towards the Dalits. That has been the experience of the sweepers who now claim to be Valmikis. So, if a sweeper begins to call himself a Valmiki or a Chamar a Ravidasi or Ad-Dharmi or a carpenter a Vishwakarma, this makes no fundamental change in the attitudes of the Hindus towards them.

Q: What implications do you see Sanskritisation having for the Dalit liberation struggle?

A: Sanskritisation, to my mind, is simply another name for conversion of the Dalits to Hinduism, or, to be more precise, Brahminism, It has had a very negative impact on the Dalit quest for liberation. It further divides the Dalits. Take the case of the Chamars, the most populous caste in north India. Because of the process of what you call Sanskritisation, they are now divided into 62 sub-castes, none of which intermarries with the others. In Uttar Pradesh, the sweepers are divided into several endogamous groups, And, besides this, Sanskritisation really does not result in any change in the attitudes of those who have been practicing untouchability towards them for centuries. Shapes may change, forms may change, but the deep-rooted hatred remains.

As I see it, the Hinduisation of the Dalits makes the process of Dalit assertion much more difficult, because the more Hinduised Dalit castes begin to hate their own people who are less Hinduised. Now, if you ask a Valmiki man to marry a Dhanuk or Bansphod woman, he would refuse, because the Dhanuks and Bansphods are much less Hinduised than the Valmikis.

Q: What implications does the Hindutva agenda have for the Dalit communities and their struggle for liberation?

A: In my opinion, the Hindutva organisations would like to bring the Dalits, who are actually not Hindus, into the Hindu fold and leave them there, at the bottom of the heap. Now, that is also what Gandhi attempted to do. He used to tell the Dalits that God had created them simply to serve the so-called upper castes and that they should carry on with their caste occupations in the hope that in their next life they would be born in a higher caste. That is also what the Hindutva project is all about. So, from the Dalit point of view, the rise of Hindutva is a very dangerous development. If you are really serious about bringing about a fundamental structural change, and not simply cosmetic change, in this caste-ridden society whose roots are in religion, you have to strike at both the caste system as well as the religious ideology that gives it legitimacy. But this the Hindutva organisations cannot and will not do.


Q: In an ideal Hindutva set-up, what would be the status of the Dalits?

A: In the Hindutva scheme of things, the ideal, so-called 'Golden Age' which they want to drag us back to is the age of the Vedas, the Ramayana, the Gita, the Manusmriti. What was the position of the Dalits and Shudras then? We were treated worse than slaves, and this was given religious sanction by these Brahminical scriptures that the Hindutvawadis champion. So, it may have certainly been a 'Golden Age' for them, but it was beyond doubt the darkest period in history for us Dalits. As I see it, the Hindutva organisations all aim at enforcing the varna system in some form or the other, and this has the most dangerous implications for us. I was recently reading a book by Golwalkar, one-time supremo of the RSS, where he says that the caste system did no harm at all. That glorification of caste may be good from their point of view, but not for us, certainly. To my mind, the rise of Hindutva is actually a product of growing Dalit consciousness, and as the Dalits has now begun struggling for their rights the Brahminical establishment, represented by Hindutva groups, are seeking to scuttle the Dalit liberation quest by diverting the Dalits to fight with other groups like the Muslims and the Christians.


Q: What do you think is the role of religion in the broader Dalit struggle?

A: I personally feel that there are three institutions that are necessary for the proper functioning of a society. Firstly, the institution of marriage. Secondly, the institution of government. And thirdly, the institution of religion which gives people a moral code to live by and binds them together. This question agitated the mind of Dr. Ambedkar when he was considering severing his ties with Hinduism, with which the Dalits have only very nominally been attached historically. So, he gave us a new interpretation of Buddhism which resembles in many respects the liberation theology of the South American Catholics. The starting point in his religious quest was: What is the role of religion in society? He stressed that religion is a good nurse but can be a bad mistress, because the institution of religion has historically played both a constructive as well as a very destructive role.


Q: But many Mahayanist and Theravadin Buddhists claim that Ambedkar's interpretation of Buddhism is not in accordance with fundamental Buddhist teachings.

A: It is true that Dr. Ambedkar’s interpretation of the Buddhist dhamma differs in several important respects from both the Mahayana and the Theravada, but then right from the early Buddhist period, from soon after the death of the Buddha, Buddhism has been characterized by a tremendous internal diversity. In Japan, for instance, there are some 1260 different Buddhist sects.

Q: What do you feel about the emergence of what is called Dalit Christian theology?

A: Dalit Christian theology emerged in the last one decade, primarily as a response to the growing assertion of the Dalits. My own personal feeling is that it is being used as a means of self-defence by Dalits within the Church to challenge the ‘upper’ caste hegemony in the Church structures and hierarchies. I don't see Dalit Christian theology as having had any noticeable impact on the non-Christian Dalits, however. In fact, many among the latter are quite suspicious of the aims of the Church now that it has suddenly begun to present itself as the champion of the Dalits. I feel that the Church authorities are now greatly alarmed as the number of Christians is going down, as several Dalit Christians are leaving the Church to avail of reservation benefits, which, according to the law, are not available to Christian Dalits. So, maybe Dalit Christian theology is also a means to stem that tide.

Q: So, would you say that the trend among the Dalits today is towards conversion to Buddhism rather than to Christianity?

A: Yes, at least that is how I see it. Buddhism gives them a sense of pride and identity and connects them to a glorious chapter in their own history. But the Buddhist conversion movement is not proceeding as rapidly as we would have liked it to. One reason is that very little attention has been paid to the proper training of bhikkhus [Buddhist monks], although this is something that Ambedkar seriously urged. He said that we should have regular seminaries for training monks, just as the early Buddhists had, in the form of universities such as at Nalanda and Taxila. To begin with, we tried sending our monks to Thailand for training, but many of them went off to the West after completing their course, instead of coming back to India to serve here. So, this is a great problem for us. But we are now planning to set up a seminary for training bhikkhus in the Terai region in Uttar Pradesh, where they will be taught the Buddhist scriptures, the philosophy of Ambedkarism as well as Comparative religions.

Q: What has been the impact of the conversion to Buddhism on the Mahars of Maharashtra, the community to which Ambedkar belonged?

A: As I see it, their conversion has been largely limited to a change of rituals, and has not really made much of a difference in their social status. But because of their conversion many of them have given up drinking alcohol and worshipping Hindu gods like Rama and Krishna. In Maharashtra today, Buddhists are synonymous largely with Mahars, and so the attitudes of others towards them has not really changed, but at least conversion has given them a new sense of identity and self-respect.

Q: In your opinion, can conversion to Buddhism help the process of undermining the structures of caste?

A: That is what is happening today, although gradually. For instance, the Ambedkar Mission Society, with which I am associated, and whose members are all Buddhists, insists that at least one person in the family of all our members must marry outside his or her own caste. This is the only way to destroy the caste system. If Dalits from different castes begin to convert to Buddhism and start inter-marrying, the internal divisions that have historically worked to weaken the Dalits will gradually begin to disappear. Conversion to Buddhism, in my view, will help consolidate the Dalits into one community, giving them a sense of pride and a positive identity. If they do not convert, they will remain divided into several hundred caste groups and will not be able to assert themselves at all.