Spiritual In Ambedkar: From Margin to Mahaparinirvana

How should the individual be conditioned to virtue and morality to reorder society with justice and truth? What is moral and who is a wise man? Classical Western philosophers engaged with many such philosophical dualisms. Humanistic wisdom must be carved out from pure reason, as Socrates determined. While Plato’s Republic characterizes justice as a personal virtue, for Aristotle “there is an intimate connection between living virtuously and living happily” (Kenny, 1988:69). The quest for personal virtue remained an uninterrupted philosophical inquiry and travelled from the classical to the medieval and once again became the centre of modern Western thought. From earliest mechanical to more modern-organic, the transformation of societal order in the West represents the transformation of philosophy too. Plato’s ‘Republic’ in classic Greek, Augustine’s ‘City of God’ in medieval theology, Machiavelli’s political ‘Utopia’ in the Western Renaissance, Hobbes’ ‘Social Contract’ in the modern West, Hume’s scientific empiricism in the Enlightenment era, Hegel’s German idealism in the 19th century, and Marx’s revolutionary communism in the mid-19th century—all of these in the history of Western society appear as a stepladder of human evolution and evolution in systems of human thought. Such transaction and transformation of human society indeed signify the principles of reconstruction of society rooted in philosophical thought.

Has Indian society gone through the same stages of human evolution? Does the history of Indian philosophy confront the same questions as Western philosophy did? Contrary to the chronological development of Western society and philosophy, the history of India is embedded in the constant conflict between Vedic philosophy and non-Brahmanical traditions. Although one can place Indian philosophical thoughts in chronological order as Vedic-Hindu Philosophy, Buddhist Philosophy, Cārvāka Philosophy, Jain Philosophy, Nyaya and Samkhya philosophy, the Vedic philosophy, unlike in the West, was not an extension to the later emergence of non-Vedic philosophical thoughts. The non-Vedic philosophical schools rather emerged to end the Brahmanical tradition of Vedic thought. Interestingly, there are no concrete historical evidences available on the exact period of origin of the Vedas. Ambedkar in his Riddles in Hinduism argued that “there is hardly any Hindu who does not regard the Vedas as the most sacred Book of his religion. And yet ask any Hindu what is the origin of the Vedas and it would be difficult to find one who can give a clear and a definite answer to the simple question. Of course, if the question was addressed to a Vedic Brahmin he would say that the Vedas are Sanatan. But this is no answer to the question” (1987:16). Consequently, the idea that there was something called the Vedic period that existed in a real sense has also become the part of intellectual scrutiny. Therefore, Indian history and philosophy should be read not through chronology but through the prism of conflicts.

For instance, Buddhism has been posed as a value system against Brahmanical Vedic tradition. Buddhism has been popular for its uncompromising ethics and high moral ideals. According to Kancha Ilaiah (2000), “Buddha chose ideological rather than military means to attack brahminical hegemony and change the power equation.” After the Buddhist movement against Brahmanical tradition, the Bhakti movement retained the protest against caste hegemony through religious expressions. In this time, Bhakti had become a strong expressive tool for lower-caste men and women in general and for untouchables in particular. The Bhakti movement spread from south of India to the north and then from east to west. Tukaram, Kabir, Nandanar, Chokhamela, Bahenabai, Ravidas, Mirabai and many other leaders, usually called saints, of the Bhakti movement, challenged caste hegemony through their devotional songs known as abhangs or dohas. The songs of Ravidas mirror both a sense of poverty as well as caste humiliation and also a yearning to find a utopia devoid of “suffering, taxes or property; one that is, above all, a Begumpura or ‘Queen City’ of companionship” (Omvedt, 2003 p. 193).

Ambedkar had received modern knowledge from Western universities; yet, his spiritual and philosophical zest was much rooted in India. He was quite influenced by the Bhakti saints who rebelled against caste injustice through Bhakti (devotional) songs. Tukaram and Kabir were two such saints whose songs Ambedkar would cite on many occasions. As Ambedkar’s father came from the Kabir Panti tradition, the influence of Kabir’s idea of a just society was evident on Ambedkar. For Ambedkar, Kabir’s poems expressed gracefully in imaginative terms, the rational and secular ideas of Buddha (Lokhande, 1977:9). Although he converted to Buddhism in the later part of his life, the influence of Buddhist ideas of equality, justice and rationality were present in his activism throughout the course of his struggle. For instance, like in Buddhist philosophy, an individual is responsible both for his/her own sorrow and enlightenment, Ambedkar’s thoughts modeled this in the same way. He believed that “man … is a factor in making of history and environmental forces whether impersonal or social if they are the first and not the last things” (Naik, 2004:28-29).

While Buddhist philosophy helped Ambedkar to spiritualize his struggle radically, he rejected Hinduism for having no spiritual freedom for the individual. He argued that caste is the soul of Hinduism and that the ritual system of Hindu religion sanctions caste. He, therefore, rejected the sanctity of Hindu Shastras, Vedas and Smritis and saw the ultimate solution for annihilation of caste in the complete destruction of Hindu scriptures. He refuted any valorization of Hindu civilization and argued that “philosophy of Hinduism neither satisfies the test of social utility nor does it satisfy the test of individual justice”. He argued against Gandhi’s spiritual justification of caste. For Ambedkar, “ideal of following one’s ancestral calling is not only impossible and impractical ideal, but it is also morally an indefensible ideal” (Ambedkar, 1945: 46).

In order to counter the stratified system of caste and its immoral religious and spiritual justification, Ambedkar reintroduced Buddhism as a counter to Brahmanism. On 14 October 1956, Ambedkar finally denounced Hinduism and converted to Buddhism with his lakhs of followers at Nagpur. An observer wrote, “it seems Ambedkar has turned Nagpur into Pandharpur, such crowds I have never seen” (cited in Zelliot 2004: 169).

To transform the social future of Dalits, Ambedkar engaged with Buddhist history through the lens of the oppressed. This new Buddhism, he termed as Navayana (new vehicle) Buddhism. In reinterpreting Buddhism, Ambedkar emphasized values like morality and rationality, which are clearly written in the introduction of his book ‘Buddha and his Dhamma’. He spent a good deal of effort contrasting Buddhist ‘dhamma’ with the Brahmanical caste–ridden ‘dharma’ (Omvedt, 2004:152). Many Buddhist scholars see Ambedkar’s Buddhism as a departure from the real or existing and popular philosophy of Buddhism. According to Timothy Fitzgerald (1989), Ambedkar’s book ‘Buddha and His Dhamma’ fails to follow standard Buddhist metaphysical positions, and there is nothing distinctively Buddhist about the exposition given in the book. However, Buddhism for Ambedkar was not just a gospel for individual liberation; rather he interpreted it as an emancipatory socio-spiritual teaching to end social suffering. He equated social suffering and exploitation of the community with the Buddhist understanding of Dukkha (sorrow). In addition, Ambedkar used modern methods to understand Buddhist rationality and logic (See Ambedkar, 1957: 14).

Russell said that: “science appeals to human reason rather than to authority, whether that of tradition or that of revelation” (Russell, 1945:10). Ambedkar, too, in his interpretation of Buddhism, posed it as a scientific revolution against the authority of caste. One of the reasons why Ambedkar was drawn to Buddhism is that unlike other religions, Buddhism is the only religion not having the concept of God’s messenger; it thus allows to challenge authority (See Ambedkar, 1957). After his death Ambedkar was venerated as a bodhisattva, i.e. an embodiment of Lord Buddha.

6th December – the death anniversary of Babasaheb is observed as Mahaparinirvan Diwas among his followers. Buddhist linguistics represents the new cultural reshaping of new Buddhist-Dalits. Moreover, it has become a cultural tool to deconstruct the Brahmanical inferiority prescribed by the Hindu Shastras. As the word ‘Mahaparinirvan’ signifies—the ultimate spiritual state within the traditional Buddhist literature—Ambedkar occupies the spiritual along with the socio-political cognition of new Buddhist Dalits. On the contrary, the popular imagery outside the community limits Ambedkar either as a political leader of Dalits or just a constitution maker. His conversion into Buddhism is generally understood as an act of escape from caste apartheid within the Hindu religion. The common understanding Hindu upper castes share about Ambedkar’s conversion is that he was not against Hinduism as such; it was just a caste system he wanted to remove from Hindu religion. Therefore, for many, Ambedkar’s conversion into Buddhism was more about politics than the spiritual.

However, the biographical evidences from his early life to his last treatise i.e. The Buddha and His Dhamma, speak differently. The spiritual aspects of life were introduced to him by his family in his childhood. As his family followed the Kabir Panti tradition, Kabir’s philosophy had a great influence on Ambedkar. Kabir and Tukaram were two such saints whose songs Ambedkar would cite at many occasions. Ambedkar’s childhood was interwoven with the experienced reality of caste and untouchability on one hand and on the other hand with values like freedom, equality and justice. He found these values in Kabir, Tukaram and later in the Buddha’s Dhamma. Although he converted into Buddhism in later part of his life, the influence of Buddhist ideas of equality, justice and rationality were present all through his writings, speeches and activism. For instance, like in Buddhist philosophy, an individual is responsible both for his/her own sorrow and enlightenment, Ambedkar’s thoughts modeled this in the same way. He believed that “man is a factor in the making of history and environmental forces whether impersonal or social if they are the first and not the last things”.

Sangharakshita, a founder of the Triratna Buddhist Community and the author of ‘Ambedkar and Buddhism’ finds reminiscent of Buddhism in Ambedkar’s early writings. Sangharakshita equates Ambedkar’s idea of “force as energy which Ambedkar explained in a review article on Bertrand Russell’s ‘The Principles of Social Reconstruction’ to the Buddhist concepts like virya, energy or vigour, as being indispensable at every stage of spiritual life”. Moreover, with the deep sense of epistemic violence of caste and the zest for restructuring an emancipatory path Ambedkar carved out radical aspects of Buddhist spirituality. Departing from the conventional Buddhist methods, he wanted a walking Buddha who symbolizes the propagation of Dhamma—and end of ‘Dukkha’. Ambedkar himself painted a Buddha with his eyes open. Yashwant Manohar – an Ambedkarite intellectual recounts the significance of the open-eyed Buddha painting. The painting he says is as radical as the twenty two vows Ambedkar prescribed to his followers on the day of conversion, it is as revolutionary as Annihilation of Caste. And it is as explosive as Riddles in Hinduism.

From investigating the present Dukkha (suffering) which is caste–class inequality to renouncing the age-old Brahmanical practices and preparing the new religious-spiritual order for future, Ambedkar found a glorious Buddhist past of the untouchables. According to him, untouchables were earlier Buddhists. He argued that “the history of India is nothing but a history of mortal conflict between Buddhism and Brahmanism”. He juxtaposed the Buddhist ‘dhamma’ against the Brahmanical caste–ridden ‘dharma’. Therefore, for him the battle for justice was not just the battle for material resources but also for regaining the lost dignity through Buddhist morals and principles. Ambedkar believed that the new Buddhist identity would enable Dalits to reclaim universal human rights and give spiritual freedom to break the mental slavery of caste. In advice to his followers Ambedkar proclaimed “The battle to me is a matter of joy. The battle is in the fullest sense spiritual. There is nothing material or social in it. For ours is a battle not for wealth or for power. It is a battle for freedom. It is a battle for reclamations of the human personality”.

His position in the caste society and responsibility of most marginalized shaped Ambedkar’s spiritual life differently than the other progressive leaders of his time. For instance, through the concept of ‘Seva’, which was rooted in the Hindu spiritual life, Gandhi found a way to do service to the oppressed. Ambedkar, however, relied on the Buddhist concept of ‘Karuna’ and ‘Samata’ as moral and spiritual principles for the emancipation of the oppressed. He reintroduced Buddhism on the soil where it was born and then destroyed. His contribution towards Buddhism is considered as ‘Dhammacakkappavattana’ and the day he converted into Buddhism is celebrated as a Dhammachakra Pravartan Day which has been symbolized as recommencement of the Buddha “Dhamma-Wheel”. After his death Ambedkar was venerated as a bodhisattva i.e. an embodiment of Lord Buddha.

To others he may be leader, intellectual, reformer, but to us Babasaheb Ambedkar is a prophet, whose compassion does not spare even God's morality if it is against the oppressed.

Spiritual In Ambedkar: From Margin to Mahaparinirvana

Dr. Rahul Sonpimple

Enjoyed this article?