Following answer is one such attempt to answer the question, "In a nutshell, what is Ambedkarism?"
Any ‘ism’ is simply the philosophy/thought of the person (or group) after whom the philosophy is named.
The ultimate aim of human existence should be the cultivation (and therefore expansion) of mind, developing the human being, leading to manifestation of liberty, equality, fraternity and social justice in society.
When Dr. Ambedkar used the words “greatest enemy", HE LITERALLY MEANT IT but WHY? (I hope to make this crystal clear by the end of the article).
The actual words used by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar were, “Gandhi is the greatest enemy the untouchables ever had in India"
When did Dr. Ambedkar say, "Gandhi is the greatest enemy the untouchables ever had in India?”
Dr. Ambedkar won the right to a seperate electorate for the scheduled classes in the famous RTC (Round Table Conferences) in London by proving that the Avarna Untouchables were NOT HINDUS. Muslims, Sikhs and the Anglo-Indians already had that right. Then on what basis did Mr. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi go on hunger-strike after the RTC, if not for the benefit of the Dwija Varnadharmis?
Mr. Gandhi's hunger-strike was nothing less than an unethical emotional black-mail to force Dr. Ambedkar into giving up the legal rights he struggled and won for the NON-HINDU Avarna untouchables. The only way those rights could be taken away by anyone was by way of labelling them as Hindus and the ONLY way to do that was if Dr. Ambedkar was somehow coerced into accepting the Hindu label for the Avarna Untouchables.
In order to understand why Dr. Ambedkar said, "Gandhi is the greatest enemy the untouchables ever had in India," it is important to know how the meaning of the word "Hindu" has changed over the past two centuries or so, to the currently assumed and perceived definition. This keeps the masses, especially the Scheduled Castes diaspora in confusion because the meaning of Hindu is interchangeably used "as and when required" by the de-facto ruling classes.
THREE DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS OF HINDU AT DIFFERENT PERIODS IN HISTORY:
1. The PERSIAN HINDUS:
Originally, the word Hindu, coined by the Persians was nothing more than a geographic identity for the people living in the land they called Hindustan. These were the PERSIAN HINDUS (There are no more Persian Hindus). They had nothing to do with any religious identity.
Hindustan disintegrated into Pakistan, Nepal, India, Bangladesh Myanmar and a few more political countries. At the formation of these countries new nationalities were naturally created. The Hindus of the disintegrated Hindustan rightly became and started calling themselves Pakistanis, Nepalis, Indians, Bangladeshis etc. It was only the Indian Varnadharmi politicians and religious leaders who promoted and continued calling themselves Hindus, even after the Indian constitution came into force on 26th January1950 which clearly stipulates the name of the country and its citizens.
2. The BRITISH HINDUS:
After the British colonized Hindustan and coined the word "Hinduism", the meaning of the word "Hindu" went through a process of change from simply being a geographic identity to "People who belonged to any of the four Varnas". These were the BRITISH HINDUS, the Varnadharmis.
In those days (as is also found in standard text books) it was common knowledge that the Hindus belonged to and were split into FOUR main classes, the four Varnas and thousands of jatis (sometimes erroneously called castes). The Avarna untouchables did not belong to this social order as they were not part of the Varnadharmi society. They lived with their own kind in seperate villages. This almost completely eliminated the risk of physical touch between the Savarnas and the Avarnas. Both, the SaVarnas and the Avarnas, were untouchable (Acchut) to each-other but only the Avarna Untouchables came to be known as "The Untouchables", the Acchuts. The SAVARNA UNTOUCHABLES came to be known as Hindus or just the Savarnas.
What is the meaning of the word Hindu?
Avarna means non-Savarna, i.e. NOT BELONGING TO ANY VARNA. SaVarna means belonging to one of the four Varnas.
Each Hindu was bound to their Varna with their assigned Varna duties (dharma, farz in urdu). In this Hindu social order, the Brahmin Varna and its associated dharma was seen as the highest and the Shudra Varna with it's seperate dharma as the lowest. The Shudra's dharma (obligations) was to serve the other three higher Varnas, the Dwijas.
(Dwija = Brahmin, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas in the Hindu Hindu social order).
3. THE NEO-HINDU:
By understanding the above definitions of Hindu, it becomes clear that Mr. Gandhi could not have been trying to save the British Hindu society from splitting. It was already split into four Dharmas. Instead, he was CREATING a NEW (neo) definition of "Hindu" so that the Avarna untouchables could also be included in that definition.
Today's "Hindu", the Nav-Hindu, in which the Avarna untouchables are also included, albeit deceptively, is not the same as the traditional "four Dharma" Hindu. It follows that SCs who are today seen as Hindu, are in reality still Varnaless/casteless NON-HINDUS.
(Is Hinduism a religion or a way of life? )
In a letter to the then Prime Minister, Mr. Ramsay Mcdonald, in September 1932 Gandhi wrote,
In the establishment of separate electorates at all for the 'depressed classes', I sense the injection of poison that is calculated to destroy Hinduism.
Gandhi was implying that there was a “religion” called Hinduism and its followers were called Hindus and these (neo) Hindus included the Avarna untouchables. Gandhi said that by allowing seperate electorate to the Avarna Untouchables meant the splitting of the fabric of this (neo) Hindu society, not the traditional four Varna 'British Hindu' society.
If Seperate Electorates had been implemented as was legally granted, NO PERSON FROM ANY SCHEDULED CATEGORY TODAY, WOULD BE SEEN AS, OR CALLED HINDU. This would've been perfectly in line with Dr. Ambedkar's vision of Prabuddha (enlightened) India. Even though he himself did not die a Hindu in any sense, in his last days Dr Ambedkar had depressing thoughts of failing in his mission of removing the FORCED Hindu identity on the Scheduled Classes (SCs). Given enough time and if kept in the dark, the danger is that the actual non Hindu Avarna untouchables would eventually begin to accept "Hindu" as their real identity. Unfortunately, this falsehood is now becoming a reality with strengthening belief that must be stopped.
THE INNOCENT, PREVIOUSLY IDENTITYLESS NON-HINDU AVARNA CLASSES THAT WERE SCHEDULED TO BE RECOGNIZED FOR THE PURPOSES OF LEGAL REPRESENTATION, HAVE DECEPTIVELY BEEN GIVEN THE (NEO) HINDU LABEL. If this is not forced conversion, then what would you call this type of conversion of identityless Avarnas to Hindu?
THAT IS WHY DR AMBEDKAR SAID, "Gandhi is the greatest enemy the untouchables ever had in India.
Despite knowing that the Hindu identity is a forced identity on them, if today's scheduled classes continue to call themselves Hindu or any other identity (e.g. a Dalit identity) diverting everyone's attention away from the fact that they never were Hindu, they are not far off from being labelled as “the greatest hypocrites in modern India." They need to reclaim their Non Hindu SC identity. No other identity except the SC identity will prove they are not Hindu, unless they go through a religious conversion or remain identity-less.
Identities like a Dalit Hindu, Dalit Buddhist, Dalit Sikh is a hinderance to that because these identities do not highlight history of nomenclature of SC and their real NON HINDU roots. Furthermore, the identityless untouchables were Varnaless and Jatiless. The only way to identify and legally classify them was to state their occupation and make a list (schedule) of their professions.
NOTE:
As hard as it was for Dr. Ambedkar to give up his legally won right of seperate electorate, saving Harijan Gandhi's life was NOT the main reason for him signing the Poona Pact (document in which Dr. Ambedkar agreed to forfeit his legal right to a separate electorate). Dr. Ambedkar received threats that If Harijan Gandhi dies during his hunger strike, there would occur a genocide of the Scheduled Avarna untouchable for whom Dr. Ambedkar won special legal rights; houses would be burnt and atrocities on an unimaginable scale could take place. If the beneficiaries aren't there to enjoy the fruit, then what use is the fruit?
Dr. Ambedkar made NO MISTAKE in deciding what was the best thing to do in this situation. He knew EXACTLY what he was doing and took the best possible step in the interest of people he was representing. He knew, if he could avoid the genocide they would live to fight another day. He signed the Poona pact and genocide was avoided. His people survived and lived but are they today effectively fighting for the same cause? They cannot be, unless they know who they were and really are. The million dollar question is, “How many SCs know that in order to win the right to seperate electorate, Dr. Ambedkar had to prove they are NOT Hindu?”
How hard are the SCs working (fighting), to convince other SCs of this fact? They ALL need to know this.
Even after knowing this history, if the SCs continue to call themselves Hindus and at the same time avail reservations in the name of occupations cum castes that were scheduled, they will only prove it to themselves that they are the greatest hypocrites in modern India and traitors to Dr. Ambedkar and his mission, forcing themselves to remain slaves with the phoney Hindu tag, proving "Gandhi is the greatest enemy the untouchables ever had in India."
(More on Alliance against Gandhi Statues:- What are some UNDENIABLE TRUTHS ABOUT M. K. GANDHI revealed by AAGS Alliance Against Gandhi Statues)
EDITOR’S NOTE: The following article is from a series of Questions asked by Dr. Ambedkar critics and answered by Mr. Shekhar Bodhakar
Here are just FIVE facts, that will hopefully completely CHANGE your perception for the better, about Dr. B.R Ambedkar.
If you have the slightest of doubts about the greatness of Ambedkar-the-great, then just the first THREE facts should be enough to shatter that belief. They are..
FACT 1:
DR. AMBEDKAR THE FREEDOM FIGHTER :
In the freedom struggle, Dr. B.R Ambedkar was the ONLY person to fight for the freedom of ALL Indians from ALL dictators and oppressors.
Please click and read the answer to the following question based on a false premise..
Was Dr B R Ambedkar a freedom fighter or not?
FACT 2:
THE ALTRUISTIC AMBEDKAR :
Indians take note: This fact needs special attention if humanity is to survive.
Even though Dr. Ambedkar is well known as one of the greatest intellectuals of his time, Ethics were more important to him than intellectual acumen because he knew that ethical people were more likely to be of greater service to society than mere intellectuals. If they were both, ethical and intellectual, that would be of the greatest value to human kind.
Fearing that there were unethical people in power taking vows to protect the Indian Constitution, Dr. Ambedkar, despite being the chairman of the drafting committee, said the following:
FACT 3:
THE COMPASSIONATE DR. AMBEDKAR :
A fact about Dr. Ambedkar that most people overlook is..
The root cause of Dr. Ambedkar’s determination and motivation to achieve all that he did was the INTENSE COMPASSION in him for the fellow human being.
IF IT WASN’T FOR THE INTENSE COMPASSION and the injustice he saw and experienced, the desire to fight for the oppressed, the suppressed, the depressed, the women, widows, orphans and the downtrodden mentally crushed and broken victims of atrocities; would not have arisen in the young Ambedkar.
No wonder he built a special place in the hearts of the underprivileged masses who dearly called him Babasaheb (father /grandfather), for he cared for them as any loving father, with a large family, would do.
FACT 4:
THE MUSICAL DR. AMBEDKAR:
Putting aside the fact that he was an intellectual giant with unmatched discipline and clear vision, Dr. Ambedkar was a keen musician too. So keen that he instructed his family and friends not to disturb him if visitors, regardless of their social and political status, arrived during his music lessons and practice. His favourite choice of instruments were the tabla and violin
A unique Theravi Music composition in Buddhist tradition, using a very rare tala (Buddha Taal) and an almost unknown araga (Buddha Virag) is dedicated to this not so well known musician, Babasaheb Dr. Ambedkar.
PHILOSOPHER & SOCIAL REFORMER:
The philosophy of Dr. Ambedkar, now termed, AMBEDKARISM, stems from his belief that the expansion and cultivation of mind should be the ultimate aim of human existence.
The welcoming side effects of this cultivation of mind is equality, liberty, fraternity and justice for all.
ALSO
Equality, liberty, fraternity and justice in society allows one to freely focus on the cultivation and expansion of mind.
The objective of Ambedkarism Equality, Liberty, Fraternity and Justice in society is NOT possible without annihilation of caste.
So, annihilation of caste, being a pre-requisite to equality, liberty & fraternity becomes the major goal of a true Indian.
Annihilation of caste is the primary aim of an Ambedkarite.
CONTRIBUTIONS OF DR. B.R AMBEDKAR NOT COMMONLY HIGHLIGHTED :
(Video in Hindi)
Author: Shekhar Bodhakar
What is the APPOINTED DAY and what was the contribution of Dr B.R. Ambedkar in the Indian freedom struggle?
Originally answered: Why did Dr Ambedkar not participate in the Indian freedom struggle?
This question is based on a false premise that Dr Ambedkar had little to do with the Indian Freedom Struggle
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar contributed towards the Upliftment and freedom of ALL Indians from ALL dictators in ways that NO other leader or social reformer did or could.
I’ll focus on just TWO of his many contributions towards the Indian freedom struggle that are hardly ever discussed.
THE TWO GREATEST contributions of Dr. Ambedkar (both related) are:
1. Dr. Ambedkar revealed to Indians and worked towards eradicating the root causes of what is preventing India from truly becoming a great and free nation again. A belief in caste being the foremost reason. Unless this cause is removed, India can only dream of becoming a "Sonya ki chiddhiya’ (a golden bird) and freedom from the ruling classes will remain a distant dream.
2. He was the ONLY person to fight for the freedom of ALL Indians from ALL dictators.
THOSE WHO THINK DR. AMBEDKAR DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE INDIAN FREEDOM STRUGGLE.. THINK AGAIN !!
I decided to reply to this question after reading many answers on internet platforms giving reasons why Dr. Ambedkar DID NOT participate in the Indian freedom struggle.
MOST ASSUMED THAT HE DIDN’T or his contributions were negligible.
Read the following quote by the greatest Indian freedom fighter carefully (especially the LAST word).
“After giving deep thought to the problem, EVERYBODY WILL HAVE TO ADMIT THAT: Conversion is necessary to the Untouchables as self-government is to India. The ultimate object of both is the same. There is not the slightest difference in their ultimate goal. This ultimate aim is to attain FREEDOM." - (Babasaheb Dr. B.R. Ambedkar (1935 Speech).
Today you will discover what has NEVER been taught in ANY school before and will never be taught by the oppressor classes in India.
Dr. Ambedkar was the only person to fight for the freedom of ALL Indians from ALL oppressors and dictators.
In this respect, his struggle for the freedom of ALL Indians, he declared as early as 1935 and again one year later in 1936 at the Nasik conference in Maharashtra.
He is the ONLY person to have saved India from permanently staying in the dark ages where social and scientific progress seemed impossible (as it had been since the decline of the Mauryan empire in Jambudeep) in the land that is now called Bharat or India.
Dr. Ambedkar saved India from the greatest imaginable tragedy by NOT participating in the struggle for freedom JUST FOR THE OPPRESSING CLASSES. He wanted EVERY single Indian to be free.
To fully appreciate the gravity of what has been said so far, you first must know the real reasons why the Dwija, especially of the dominant Varna, the Brahmins hated the British and why they wanted them to quit India.
Never before did the Brahmins rebel against any other foreign ruler so vehemently. In fact they enjoyed mutually beneficial relationships with all previous invaders and were even happy to give their daughters in wedlock to the foreigners as long as they maintained the social structure designed by the Brahmins. Only the British were hard to convince..
(Video in Hindi): Why the Brahmins wanted the British to quit India).
1). On 16th May 1775, under the East India regulatory act 1773, Nand kumar Dev became the FIRST EVER BRAHMIN TO BE CONVICTED OF MURDER. Prior to this date the Brahmins had exclusive impunity from state prosecution regardless of the crime.
2). 1795: For the FIRST TIME since the decline of the Ashokan empire, Shudras were granted the right to own property.
3).1813: Slavery abolished.
4). Also in 1813: Right to education for all granted.
5). 1817: Punishments according to Varna system made illegal.
6). 1818 - The defeat of Janeudhari Shudra Rule "Peshwa Rule" at Bhima-Koregaon
7). 1819: A ban was put on the archaic custom of a Brahmin spending the first three nights with the newly wed Shudra bride.
8). 1830: Human sacrificial rituals made illegal.
9). 1835: Compulsory offering of the first born son of a Shudra to the river Ganga made illegal.
10). Also in 1835 on 7th of March, Lord Macaulay fought for and won the right to higher education for Shudras & untouchables and the right to learn English for all non Brahmins.
Under this newly found freedom to education, the iconoclast JYOTIRAO PHULE became the first person, a Shudra, to successfully complete matriculation becoming the most educated person from what is today known as the ‘OBC Catagory’.
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR was one of the first from the so called untouchable class to be allowed to enrol for a degree under the same right to higher education and Perunthalaivar M.C. Rajah being the first degree holder of the Scheduled Community in India [ B.A in Madras Christian College, Chennai in 1900].
11). 1870: Female infanticide banned
The Female Infanticide Prevention Act, 1870, also Act VIII of 1870 was a legislative act passed in British India, to prevent murder of female infants. The Section 7 of this Act declared that it was initially applicable only to the territories of Oudh, North-Western provinces and Punjab but the Act authorized the Governor General to extend the law to any other district or province of the British Raj at his discretion.
12). 1891 - Age of Consent Bill 1891 which was opposed by Bal Gangadhar Tilak enacted. On January 9, 1891, British colonial authorities had introduced a bill to raise the age of consent for unmarried and married Indian girls from 10 to 12 years. The law targeted the Hindu practice of child marriage. Once enacted, the law served to prohibit the consummation of marriage rather than the practice itself. In several high profile cases, husbands had caused the death of their child brides and the British public was outraged. This declared it punishable as Rape Crime.
13) Untouchable were granted the right to sit on chairs.
14) The British banned the custom of ‘sati’ in which it was obligatory for the widow of the deceased to be burnt to death.
AND THE LIST CONTINUES…
“All battles for freedom are not on equal moral plane for the simple reason that the motives and purposes behind these battles of freedom are not always the same”. -Dr.Ambedkar,”Plea to the foreigner”
The continual amendments by the Brits to these draconian anti-humanity laws became a great source of worry for the Brahmins. Its about time they started a movement to kick them out.
WHO STARTED THE “SWARAJ” AND “QUIT INDIA” MOVEMENTS AND WHY?
BALAGANGADHARA TILAK
The first and strongest advocate of Swaraj (“self-rule”) was a Chitpavan Brahmin, Bal Gangadhar Tilak (1856-1920); also know as Lokmanya. He was known as “the father of Indian unrest” by the British.
The Age of Consent Act, 1891, also Act X of 1891, was a legislation enacted in British India on 19 March 1891 which raised the age of consent from 10 years for sexual intercourse for all girls, married or unmarried, to twelve years of age in all jurisdictions.
The Chitpavan Brahmins, with Tilak as their leader, were against this 1891 Age of Consent bill, seeing it as INTERFERENCE with Hinduism and a dangerous precedent.
REFERENCE: Jai Narain Sharma-Political Thought of Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak- Concept Publishing Company-ISBN 13:9788180695841)
Dr. Ambedkar, on the other hand, had TWO freedoms to fight for. Firstly, he wanted independence from the 2-3 percent Brahmins and following that, independence from the British.
No wonder the Brahmins wanted to expel the British from India. For then, they would once again become the lawmakers and live as gods.
Whereas Dr. Ambedkar was the ONLY person who truly struggled for the freedom of ALL Indians of ALL classes from ALL dictators, giving special attention to the rights of women and the most deprived people, the identity-less Avarna Untouchables in what was to become an “Independent” country. It is no surprise that for this reason, the masses began to refer to Ambedkar-the-Great as Babasaheb, meaning respected father (grandfather in some areas) for he attended to their needs as any loving father would do.
In his struggle for freedom, Dr. Ambedkar earned a special place in the hearts of the poor and the deprived, the downtrodden victims of grave atrocities, the oppressed and the suppressed, the mentally crushed and broken, the women and widows, the workers, the orphans, and the disabled.
Had Dr. Ambedkar been unsuccessful in securing these rights for the common person, it is evident that over 85% of Indians, and therefore India, would not have been TRULY an independent country. There would simply have been a PERMANENT TRANSFER OF POWER from the British to the most ardent dictators, the Brahmin-Bania alliance, on 15th August 1947.
It was not until the 26th January 1950, when the Constitution of India came into force that India truly became an independent democratic country free from both, the British and the Brahmanic rule.
Indian Independence act 1947 chapter 30 clearly states that:
15 AUGUST 1947 shall be called ‘THE APPOINTED DAY’ (Not Independence Day). It is the day appointed for transfer of power from one ruler (the British) to another ruler (The Brahmin-Bania INC).
On 15th August 1947 the British were replaced by the Brahmin-Banias. On 26th January 1950 India gained COMPLETE freedom, officially freeing itself from the Brahmanic rule too. So the true Indian independence day is 26th January 1950 and not 15th August 1947 as is commonly assumed and vehemently promotion by successive governments dominated by the Brahmin Bania.
On 25th Nov 1949 in his last parliamentary speech as the chairman of the drafting committee, Dr Ambedkar said, “On the 26th Jan 1950 India “WILL be” an independent country.”
NOTE:
If India had gained independence on the 15th of August 1947, Dr. Ambedkar would NOT have made the above statement in 1949 referring to 26th Jan 1950.
Further ahead, in the same speech, he AGAIN points to the future FOR THE SECOND TIME and says:
“On the 26th Jan 1950, India “would be” a democratic country.” This means that before 1950 India WAS NOT a democracy. BEFORE 1950 INDIA WAS COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS HINDUSTAN (which incidentally disintegrated to Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Myanmar etc).
26th January is the actual Indian independence Day (FIVE reasons)
1. The chief architect of the Indian constitution, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar specifically said so in his last official parliamentary speech as the chairman of the drafting committee.
2. Indian Independence Act 1947 chapter 30 states that 15 Aug 1947 shall be called the APPOINTED DAY (not Independence Day).
3. It was on 26th January 1950 that INDIA was officially CREATED and HINDUSTAN WAS ABOLISHED.
4. If the CURRENT Constitution didn’t come into fruition (On 6th Jan 1950) :
- NO Non-Brahmin would have tasted complete freedom and
- NO SO CALLED UNTOUCHABLE WOULD HAVE TASTED “ANY” FREEDOM at all. These being freedoms that the uninformed Indian takes for granted.
5. 26 January 1950 was the day the constitution of India came into effect replacing the Government of India Act (1935) as the governing document of India and thus, FORMED A NEW REPUBLIC, I.e. a NEW INDEPENDENT COUNTRY WITH IT'S OWN CONSTITUTION. If it wasn't for this day, you most probably would never have heard of Dr. Ambedkar and his legacy (unless some foreigner re discovered him in the future)
26th Jan is Indian Independence Day (from all external and internal dictators). On 15th Aug 1947, the comparatively little freedom that the deprived classes and women had previously gained (thanks to the British), was now at the mercy of the Brahmin Banias.
For 29 months, from the 15 Aug 1947 TO 26 Jan 1950, the Casteist Varnadharmis were the happiest people on earth.
They became free from British rule. Nothing else but the power to rule was TRANSFERRED from the..
BR-itish to the
BR-ahmin-Bania alliance.
So then, instead of the British the Brahmin-Banias became the new rulers (through TRANSFERENCE of POWER). Their happiness dwindled on 26th November 1949 because on this day it was agreed that the new constitution (of which Dr. Ambedkar was the chairman of the drafting committee), was to come into effect. The chosen day of inception was 26th January 1950. 26th November is now acknowledged and celebrated as CONSTITUTION DAY.
This makes Dr. Ambedkar the "Father of Modern free India" too, for he was the ONLY one who secured those freedoms for each and every citizen of free India without exception, without discrimination.
(FOUNDING FATHER OF MODERN INDIA; Title given to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar by Columbia University for playing his part in drafting of the Indian Constitution).
It must also be noted that:
- When it really mattered, at the time India's future was being discussed at the Round Table Conferences (RTC), Dr Ambedkar was the first and only person to officially have asked for complete independence from the British. This he did in the FIRST RTC which was boycotted by most of the Congress including M.K Gandhi
- At the SECOND RTC, Mr M.K. Gandhi, asked for "Princely States and Dominion Status" for India, with the British at center. Why is he then falsely portrayed as the great Indian independence icon?
- Dr Ambedkar was the ONLY person to have attended all three RTCs. This shows how concerned he was for India's future and how committed he was for complete independence from the British. NO OTHER "FREEDOM FIGHTER" SHOWED THAT LEVEL OF COMMITTMENT OR CONCERN.
As soon as the oppressor castes realised that the Indian Constitution was to be based on principles favouring humanity, they were the first ones to oppose it so that they could have a constitution, not so different from the law code attributed to Manu in the Manusmriti.
(BBC Video, HINDI: Exposes the secrets in the Manusmriti, an archaic book of draconian anti-humanity laws).
Thats why I say: If it wasn’t for the Constitution, we probably would NEVER have heard of Babasaheb Dr. Ambedkar or his mission. The casteists would have suppressed his name. We, very well may have had to wait until a foreigner re-discovered him. We would've gone back to the dark ages where the laws of Manu were the only laws.
One worrying cause of concern:
There is an open secret that extreme right wing BRAHMANTVA (disguised as Hindutva) leaders, in collaboration with the largest known terrorist organisation in the world, the RSS are planning to replace the current Indian Constitution with an alternative religious constitution. This is nothing less than a planned ‘latent- coup’ because it is GRADUALLY being achieved by making regular unconstitutional amendments to the current constitution. Dr. Ambedkar had foreseen that this could be a real possibility and warned the new independent India of this in his last speech as the chairman of the drafting committee.
TWO QUESTION THAT I HAVE NEVER HEARD ANYONE ASKING:
1. Why was Dr. Ambedkar the ONLY person who struggled to fight for the freedom of ALL Indians regardless of class, creed, colour or gender, from ALL oppressors and dictators?
2. Why has the above fact NEVER been highlighted by the Indian media, educational establishments and the progressive ruling governments ?
It seems there is a conspiracy to subtly defame Dr. Ambedkar, the father of modern India and champion of human rights by not highlighting his greatest contributions to India. Could it be because he came from what is termed the "Untouchable class". Even questions on popular internet platforms are being asked that prompt the reader into belittling Dr. Ambedkar, the Father of Modern India in every respect.
For example (Its worth reading these too) :
Why did B.R.Ambedkar support the British and oppose the Quit India movement?
Was Dr.Bhimrao Ambedkar poor in English?
Why is Dr Ambedkar so overraated?
Why did Dr. B.R. Ambedkar hate Hinduism?
A genuine attempt has been made to answer this question from an unbiased point of view.
Before we attempt to answer this question, we need to be fairly convinced that Dr. Ambedkar really did hate Hinduism. If he didn't, it would make no sense to answer the question which demands reasons for this hatred.
Most of the answers I have read imply that he didn’t hate Hinduism but the caste system. This means that as far as the questioner is concerned, the question remains unanswered (Yet it seems responders have provided fairly detailed answers).
Did Dr. Ambedkar hate Hinduism ?
The following two quotes of Dr. Ambedkar suggests that he did:
1. “Though I was born a Hindu, I solemnly assure you that I will not die as a Hindu.”
2. “Hindu raj must be prevented at any cost” (Dr. Ambedkar did not say anything remotely similar to this about any other belief system)
Furthermore, the following two deductions also imply that Dr. Ambedkar hated the concept of Hinduism.
- His famous ‘22 vows for converts and reverts to Buddhism’ are specifically aimed at raising awareness about the dangers of being influenced by Hinduism and no other belief system.
- No one can put forward a sensible argument that Dr. Ambedkar did not hate the caste system. Since he equated the ‘caste system’ to ‘Hinduism’, it therefore means that he hated Hinduism.
Hinduism = Casteism (Caste System)
AND
Casteism = Hinduism
Now that we have established Dr. Ambedkar wasn’t at all fond of Hinduism, we can answer the main question. WHY ?
The answer is self evident from the following quotes by Dr. Ambedkar himself, grouped under five categories 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.
2. On Food
3. On democracy
4. On Hindu nationalism and Pakistan
From Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, vol.3, p.267 (On the chapter, “The triumph of Brahminism: regicide or the birth of counter-revolution”)
1. “The first and foremost thing that must be recognised is that Hindu Society is a myth. The name Hindu is itself a foreign name. It was given by the Mohammedans to the natives for the purpose of distinguishing themselves [from them]. It does not occur in any Sanskrit work prior to the Mohammedan invasion. They did not feel the necessity of a common name, because they had no conception of their having constituted a community. Hindu Society as such does not exist. It is only a collection of castes. Each caste is conscious of its existence. Its survival is the be-all and end-all of its existence. Castes do not even form a federation. A caste has no feeling that it is affiliated to other castes, except when there is a Hindu-Muslim riot. On all other occasions each caste endeavours to segregate itself and to distinguish itself from other castes.”
2. “I shall be satisfied if I make the Hindus realise that they are the sick men of India, and that their sickness is causing danger to the health and happiness of other Indians.”
3. “Indeed the ideal Hindu must be like a rat living in his own hole, refusing to have any contact with others. There is an utter lack among the Hindus of what the sociologists call ‘consciousness of kind’. There is no Hindu consciousness of kind. In every Hindu the consciousness that exists is the consciousness of his caste. That is the reason why the Hindus cannot be said to form a society or a nation.”
4. “Anyone who relies on an attempt to turn the members of the caste Hindus into better men by improving their personal character is in my judgment wasting his energy and bugging an illusion.”
5. “In my view, what is wrong is their religion, which has inculcated this notion of Caste. If this is correct, then obviously the enemy, you must grapple with is not the people who observe Caste, but the Shastras which teach them this religion of Caste.”
6. “I have no hesitation in saying that if the Mohammedan has been cruel, the Hindu has been mean; and meanness is worse than cruelty.”
7“To put the matter in general terms, Hinduism and social union are incompatible. By its very genius Hinduism believes in social separation, which is another name for social disunity and even creates social separation. If Hindus wish to be one, they will have to discard Hinduism. They cannot be one without violating Hinduism. Hinduism is the greatest obstacle to Hindu Unity. Hinduism cannot create that longing to belong which is the basis of all social unity. On the contrary Hinduism creates an eagerness to separate.”
8. “In the Hindu religion, one can[not] have freedom of speech. A Hindu must surrender his freedom of speech. He must act according to the Vedas. If the Vedas do not support the actions, instructions must be sought from the Smritis, and if the Smritis fail to provide any such instructions, he must follow in the footsteps of the great men. He is not supposed to reason. Hence, so long as you are in the Hindu religion, you cannot expect to have freedom of thought.”
9. “If a person tells you that he is a Hindu. You feel bound to inquire into his caste. Why? Because so essential is caste in the case of a Hindu, that without knowing it you do not feel sure what sort of a being he is.”
10. “In Hinduism, conscience, reason and independent thinking have no scope for development.”
11. “Caste may be bad. Caste may lead to conduct so gross as to be called man’s inhumanity to man. All the same, it must be recognised that the Hindus observe Caste not because they are inhuman or wrong-headed. They observe Caste because they are deeply religious.”
2. On Food
1. “One can quite understand vegetarianism. One can quite understand meat-eating. But it is difficult to understand why a person who is a flesh-eater should object to one kind of flesh, namely cow’s flesh. This is an anomaly which calls for explanation.”
2. “The Census Returns show that the meat of the dead cow forms the chief item of food consumed by communities which are generally classified as untouchable communities. No Hindu community, however low, will touch cow’s flesh. There is no community which is really an Untouchable community which has not something to do with the dead cow. Some eat her flesh, some remove the skin, some manufacture articles out of her skin and bones.”
3. “The Touchables, whether they are vegetarians or flesh-eaters, are united in their objection to eat cow’s flesh. As against them stand the Untouchables, who eat cow’s flesh without compunction and as a matter of course and habit.”
4. “No one can doubt that there was a time when Hindus, both Brahmins and non-Brahmins, ate not only flesh but also beef.”
5. “That the object of the Brahmins in giving up beef-eating was to snatch away from the Buddhist Bhikshus the supremacy they had acquired is evidenced by the adoption of vegetarianism by Brahmins.”
3. On democracy
1. “In India, Bhakti or what may be called the path of devotion or hero-worship, plays a part in its politics unequalled in magnitude by the part it plays in the politics of any other country in the world. Bhakti in religion may be a road to the salvation of the soul. But in politics, Bhakti or hero-worship is a sure road to degradation and to eventual dictatorship.”
2. “I do not want that our loyalty as Indians should be in the slightest way affected by any competitive loyalty whether that loyalty arises out of our religion, out of our culture or out of our language. I want all people to be Indians first, Indian last and nothing else but Indians.”
4.On Hindu nationalism and Pakistan
1. “If Hindu Raj does become a fact, it will, no doubt be the greatest calamity for this country. No matter what the Hindus say, Hinduism is a menace to liberty, equality and fraternity. It is incompatible with democracy. Hindu raj must be prevented at any cost.”
2. “But it is right to ask if the Musalmans are the only sufferers from the evils that admittedly result from the undemocratic character of Hindu society. Are not the millions of Shudras and non-Brahmins, or millions of the Untouchables, suffering the worst consequences of the undemocratic character of Hindu society?”
3. “Not partition, but the abolition of the Muslim League and the formation of a mixed party of Hindus and Muslims is the only effective way of burying the ghost of Hindu Raj.”
4. “This attitude of keeping education, wealth and power as a close preserve for themselves and refusing to share it, which the high caste Hindus have developed in their relation with the lower classes of Hindus, is sought to be extended by them to the Muslims. They want to exclude the Muslims from place and power, as they have done to the lower class Hindus. This trait of the high caste Hindus is the key to the understanding of their politics.”
5. “High caste of Hindus who have denied and deprived them of ordinary human right for centuries.”
1. “Though I was born a Hindu, I solemnly assure you that I will not die as a Hindu.” – Before converting to Buddhism
2. “I will not believe in Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh. Neither would I worship them.” – In 22 vows administered while converting to Buddhism
3. “The history of India is nothing but a history of a mortal conflict between Buddhism and Brahminism.”
THERE IS MORE..
Author: Shekhar Bodhakar
What were Babasaheb Dr. Ambedkar’s five vows administered by him in 1927 on Manusmitri Dahan Day?
Most people are aware of 22 vows of Dr. Ambedkar but did you know there were also FIVE VOWS OF DR AMBEDKAR ADMINISTERED BY HIM ON MANUSMRITI DAHAN DAY.
Familiarise yourself with these vows before you even think about burning the Manusmriti.
1. I do not believe on Chaturvarna based on birth.
2. I do not believe in caste distinctions.
3. I believe that untouchability is an anathema on Hinduism and I will HONESTLY TRY MY BEST to completely destroy it.
4. Considering that there is no inequality, I will not follow any restrictions about food and drink among at least all Hindus.
5. I believe that untouchables must have equal rights in temples, water sources, schools and other amenities.
My personal view is that these five vows are the absolute minimum one needs to take before calling themselves AMBEDKARITES. One beauty of these vows is that they can be taken by ANYONE without affecting their religious views.
REFERENCE:
Five vows of Babasaheb Dr. B. R. Ambedkar on Manusmriti dahan DAY~ by Dr. K. Jamanadas
Author: Shekhar Bodhakar
Who is the founding father of modern India?
DR. BHIMRAO AMBEDKAR is the FOUNDING FATHER OF MODERN INDIA
Here's WHY? ...
This Title was conferred upon Dr. Ambedkar by Columbia University for the part he played in authoring the Indian Constitution.
Above is a screenshot from the prestigious Columbia University website. It clearly shows Dr. B.R.Ambedkar as the founding father of modern India.
ONLY Ambedkar-the-Great is OFFICIALLY recognised as the founding father of modern India. No one else. There are good reasons for that.
1. From the options available at the Roundtable Conferences, Dr. Ambedkar was the first person, at the first conference, to demand COMPLETE independence from the British. Mr Gandhi (at the second conference) asked for British Dominion (at the centre) with Princely states.
2. Any modernisation you have in India is only because Dr. Ambedkar set the foundations for it to be so in the constitution. "To develop scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform" is one of the fundamental duties of the people of the Republic of India, according to the Constitution of India.
3. These are the words of T.T.Krishnamachari, said in his Constituent assembly speech about Dr. Ambedkar's dedicatory contribution. "Out of the seven members selected to prepare the draft constitution, one resigned, one died, one left for America, one was busy with his work in princely state, one or two live away from Delhi, some had to be excused for health reasons, Dr. Ambedkar was the only one who had to bear the burnt."[Why is Dr. BR Ambedkar regarded as the father of the Constitution? What were other constituent assembly members doing then?]
4. Dr. Ambedkar was the ONLY person to fight for the freedom of ALL Indians from ALL dictators. Discover the truth behind the freedom struggle at : What was the contribution of Dr B.R. Ambedkar in the Indian freedom struggle?
5. Dr. Ambedkar abolished Hindostan by LITERALLY CREATING INDIA with a pen, inserting the name into it's constitution. The first article of the Constitution of India states that "India, that is Bharat, shall be a union of states," implicitly codifying "INDIA" and "BHARAT" as equally official short names for the REPUBLIC OF INDIA.
The words “that is” have a special significance. So, when the Hindutva right wing elements say something like, “Oh India is just an English equivalent of Hindustan”, THEY ARE WRONG. It is BHARAT that is equivalent to India.
NOTE TO THE POLITICIANS AND MEDIA:
THOSE WHO REFER TO INDIA AS HINDUSTAN.. BEWARE !!
Referring to INDIA by any other name is a serious insult to the constitution, the country, it's founding father and it's citizens. Legal action can and should be taken against ANYONE who displays this anti-constitutional behaviour.
NOTE TO THE CITIZENS OF INDIA :
Correct anyone who refers to India by any other name except BHARAT. Notify them that steps to legal action against them are in place and if they do not stop, legal action will be taken.
Honour the founding father of modern India by taking the vow to protect Indian sovereignty by defending it's constitution.
NOTE TO THE WOMEN OF MODERN INDIA:
The Founding Father of Modern India said that he measures the progress of a community by the degree of progress which women have made.
Before the inception of the Indian Constitution!, WOMEN HAD NO RIGHTS. So EVERY Indian women, regardless of race, religion, caste and creed who enjoys the fruits of social, political and gender equality owes an insurmountable debt of gratitude to Dr. Ambedkar. If you can read this or have a high flying job with a bank account or have ever voted, thank the founding father of modern India, Ambedkar-the-great.
NOTE TO THE SOCIAL REFORMERS:
The Founding father of India opened the door via the constitution to annihilate caste because:
To make into reality, the dream of an Enlightened India (Prabuddha Bharat), is NOT POSSIBLE without the annihilation of caste.
Annihilation of caste is not the solution to all problems faced by modern India but without annihilating caste you cannot have equality, liberty, fraternity and justice for all. This ideal, etched in the PREAMBLE of the Constitution of India by the founding father of modern India.
AND LASTLY A QUICK VIDEO FOR INDIAN TEACHERS (in Hindi)
Important Contributions of Dr. Ambedkar not taught in Schools.
22 VOWS OF BABASAHEB DR B.R. AMBEDKAR
BACKGROUND:
Babasaheb Dr. B. R. Ambedkar prescribed these vows so that:
1. There may be complete severance of bond with the old Hindu customs that promote superstition and caste which in turn hinders fraternity, human progress and scientific temper
2. To protect Buddhism from unnecessary confusion, contradictions and adulteration
These vows were administered by Babasaheb Dr Bhimrao Ambedkar after the official conversion ceremony on 14th October 1956 and then again on15th October 1956 in Marathi
(REFERENCE: Ambedkar Speaks, Volume 2 edited by Narendra Jadhav)
THE VOWS:
(1) I shall have no faith in Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh, nor shall I worship them
(2) I shall have no faith in Rama and Krishna, nor shall I worship them
(3) I shall have no faith in "Gouri", "Ganpati" and other gods and goddesses of Hindu religion, nor shall I worship them
(4) I do not believe in the theory of incarnation of gods
(5) I do not and shall not believe that the Lord Buddha was the incarnation of Vishnu. I believe this to be, mischievous and false propaganda
(6) I shall not perform "Shraaddha" nor, shall I give "Pind-daan"
(7) I shall not act in any manner contrary to the principles and teachings of the Buddha
(10) I shall endeavour to establish equality
(11) I shall follow the Eightfold Path taught by the Buddha
(12) I shall follow the "Ten Paramitas" enunciated by the Buddha
(13) I shall be compassionate to all living beings and nurture them with care
(14) I shall not steal
(15) I shall not lie
(16) I shall not commit carnal sins
(17) I shall not consume liquor
(18) I shall strive to lead my life in conformity with the three principles of Buddhism, that is, Pradnya (wisdom), Sila (character) and Karuna (compassion)
(19) I hereby embrace Buddhism by renouncing my old Hindu religion which is detrimental to the prosperity to human kind, and discriminate human beings and treat them low
(20) I firmly believe that the Buddha Dhamma is the Saddhamma
(21) I believe I am entering a new life
(22) Hereafter, I pledge to conduct myself in accordance with the teachings of the Buddha
This article is from a series of Questions asked on the internet and answered by Shekhar Bodhakar
Before I answer this question!, I would like to point out the following:
1. Many supporters of the Manusmriti, commonly known as the Manuvadis, are supposedly “answering” this question. THEY ARE NOT. They are basically just leaving comments (not answering). They surprisingly received many upvotes
2.
It's great to include extra information to support your answers, PROVIDED the question is actually answered . It does not compute that someone volunteers to answer the question byAVOIDING to answer the ACTUAL question asked !!
Here's my answer:
DR AMBEDKAR DID NOT BURN THE MANUSMRITI. IT WAS BURNT BY THE HANDS OF A BRAHMIN NAMED GANGADHAR NEELKANTH SAHASRABUDDHE and Dr Ambedkar, along with people of various castes including the Brahmins were present at the event
Why did Dr. Ambedkar welcome the burning of the Manusmriti
Dr. Ambedkar based his philosophy on the belief that the purpose/aim of human existence should be the cultivation of mind. No person should attempt to prevent another person exercising this right.
i.e, in society there must be equality, liberty, fraternity and justice to allow all to fulfill this purpose.
Dr. Ambedkar saw that the laws in the Manusmriti were counter to establishing equality, liberty, fraternity and proper justice. This cannot be achieved in a society where the concept of jaat/jati (loosely termed ‘caste’) exists. So the annihilation of caste (and anything that supports the caste system) becomes an Ambedkarite’s priority number one.
I hope that answers the question asked
BBC NEWS (HINDI) Video exposes the Manusmriti:
The cruel punishments for violating the inhumane laws of Manu were mainly directed towards women and the Shudras, depriving them of the most basic human rights. Many extreme right-wing religious fundamentalist are attempting the re introduction of the Manusmriti with the aim of replacing the current Indian constitution with this anti humanity law book.
WHY did the Brahmin, GANGADHAR NEELKANTH SAHASRABUDDHE, put the Manusmriti to ashes ?
Answer: Because it contains hundreds (if not thousands) of verses that encourage anti humanity behaviour, especially towards women.
On 25th December 1927 at 9PM Dr Ambedkar participated in the public burning of the Manusmriti at the hands of a Brahmin, Bapusahib Sahastrabuddhe.
This has now become a public event known as “Manusmriti Dahan Day” and “Istree Mukti Divas” or “(Indian) Women’s Freedom Day” but is not highlighted by the Indian authorities.
SOME QUOTES FROM THE MANUSMRITI:
(11 & 12 are from other Brahmanic religious texts that back the Manusmriti) :
1. If a person of lower caste adopts the occupation of a higher caste, the king ought to deprive him of all his property and expel him from his kingdom. (Manusmriti, X: 96)
2. If a Shudra (lowest caste member) dares to give moral lessons to a Brahmin, the king is to get him punished by pouring hot oil in his ear and mouth. (Manusmriti, VII: 272)
3. Similarly, if a Shudra occupies the same seat as a Brahmin, he is to be punished by branding his waist (with hot rod) or getting his buttocks cut! (Manusmriti, VIII: 281)
4. Even if the husband is morally degraded, engaged in an affair with another woman and is devoid of knowledge and other qualities, the wife must treat him like a god. (Manusmriti, V: 154)
5. Women should never be allowed by their guardians to act independently (Manusmriti, IX: 2)
6. If a person of lower varna (& lower caste) has sexual relations with a woman of higher varna, with or without her consent, he is to be killed. (Manusmriti, VIII: 366)
7. If a Brahmin (highest Varna) abuses a Shudra (lowest varna), he is to be fined mildly, but if a Shudra abuses a Brahmin, he is to be killed. (Manusmriti, VIII: 267/268)
8. If a Brahmin kills a Shudra , he is to perform penance by killing a cat, frog, owl or crow, etc. (Manusmriti, XI: 131)
9. Non-believers, including freethinkers, rationalists and Buddhists, are not to be entertained respectfully as guests; though, mercifully, they may be given food (Manusmriti, MS IV: 30)
10. The families of non-believers are destroyed sooner than later. (Manusmriti, MS III: 65)
11. If a woman should not grant her man his desire, he should bribe her. If she still does not grant him his desire, he should hit her with a stick or with his hand, and overcome her, saying: 'With power, with glory I take away your glory!' Thus she becomes inglorious. (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 6.4.7)
12. It is the highest duty of the woman to burn herself after her husband. (Brahma Purana 80.75)
13. When a woman, proud of her relations [or abilities] deceives her husband (with another man), then the king should [ensure that] she be torn apart by dogs in place much frequented by people and the evil man should be burnt in a bed of red-hot iron. (Manusmriti, MS VIII: 371/372)
14. Offering presents (to a woman), romping (with her), touching her ornaments and dress, sitting with her on a bed, all these acts are considered adulterous acts. (Manusmriti, MS VIII: 357)
There is more, a lot more ..
Importance of Dr Ambedkar’s formula “Educate Agitate Organise” for achieving social justice
Human rights activists need to remember that liberty, equality, fraternity (LEF) and social justice, the ideals of Ambedkarism IS IMPOSSIBLE to achieve in a caste-based society and EDUCATE AGITATE ORGANIZE is the formula (not the aim) to achieve these ideals in a jaatiless (casteless) and just society.
Babasaheb Dr Ambedkar clearly states that he has not borrowed this formula from any revolution but from the teachings of the great Buddha himself, adding ‘social justice’ to the principles of Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.
What is RIGHT Education?
RIGHT Education is education that leads to your DESIRED GOALS. It does not mean literacy or gaining knowledge about facts which has nothing to do with your goal. These goals vary according to the individual. The goal of Dr Ambedkar was to transform Indian society into a society where there is social justice, liberty, equality and fraternity. If your education is not directed towards that goal (providing that is your goal), then that education, no matter how useful in other matters, is not RIGHT education for THAT SPECIFIC GOAL. It may be the right education to achieve other personal goals.
Keeping this goal in mind, Dr Ambedkar said educate, agitate, organise.
Not EDUCATED means can’t read about how you were pushed into caste slavery, so won’t get agitated to annihilate caste. RIGHT education leads to RIGHT kind of internal agitation.
Not AGITATED enough means you won’t be motivated enough to get organised so as to fight for annihilation of caste.
Not ORGANISED to exterminate caste means allowing the next generation to be brainwashed into believing they belong to a caste, not realizing that the BEST SLAVE IS HE WHO THINK HE’S FREE.
So, in whose benefit is it that you don’t get educated? It all starts with RIGHT education.
CAUSE OF CONCERN TO AMBEDKARITES:
THERE IS CONTINUING AND COMPOUNDING CONFUSION, EVEN AMONGST SOME EDUCATED, ELITE LEADERS OF THE AMBEDKARITE SOCIAL MOVEMENT AS TO THE CORRECT ORDER OF THE FORMULA.
Dr B R Ambedkar said, “Educate, Agitate and Organize”. He did not say “Educate, Organize Agitate.” Why is there this confusion?
Kindly read the following words of Dr Babasaheb which he said, amidst the rousing welcome and thunderous cheers of 70,000 persons, on 9th July, 1942 in the All India Depressed Classes Conference at Mohan Park in Nagpur presided over by the President-elect Mr N Sivaraj from Madras and get the confusion removed once and for all. PLEASE:
“My final words of advice to you is educate, agitate and organize; have faith in yourself. With justice on our side, I do not see how we can lose our battle. 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 the reclamation of human personality.”
AS AN EXAMPLE:
Through his Writings and Speeches, Ambedkar the great EDUCATES us with the facts of our glorifying and golden past and compares with the pitiable life of present by highlighting the systematic injustice done to us by the casteist anti-human forces and urges us to redeem the lost past in order to lead an honourable life.
Then our minds get awakened and start AGITATING to regain the golden past or at least to lead a dignified life with equality at par with other Indians and reluctantly, we ORGANIZE ourselves and establish a forum or association or movement or a political party to pursue the goal and then retain the goal so achieved.
Hence, let us not commit the blunder again and again and always bear the correct order in mind: EDUCATE, AGITATE AND ORGANIZE
This liberating formula, you must act on at a personal level before educating the masses. Remember at all times that the goal is Social Justice for all, enjoying liberty, equality, fraternity which is not possible without annihilation of Jaati/caste identities.
Author: Shekhar Bodhakar
No comments:
Post a Comment