Ambedkar Speaks (Vol I, Ii And Iii)
Author: Narendra Jadhav
Publisher : Konark, Rs4,000
Narendra Jadhav is pained to see BR Ambedkar being projected as a Dalit icon. He was a national leader, an economist and a women rights activist, tells the author to Utpal Kumar
Narendra Jadhav has achieved a lot in his life. He is a bureaucrat, economist, social scientist, writer and educationist — all in one. While giving credit to his father — along with BR Ambedkar — for all his achievements, he gets emotional. “When I look back, I realise my father was quite an intelligent person. But he couldn’t come out of his wretchedness. Had he got a fair opportunity, he would have achieved much more than what I have in all these years.” Jadhav’s father, however, did what he could: He followed the advice of Ambedkar and ensured his sons get good education and thus outgrow the impediments of the regressive social order.
So, is this the reason why he has come up with the three-volume book on the speeches of AmbedkarIJ “No,” says Jadhav, “it’s not just personal. There is so much confusion regarding Ambedkar and his ideas that I couldn’t stop myself from compiling this book.”
Jadhav is pained to see Ambedkar being painted as a Dalit leader. “Only two things come to the mind of people when they think of Ambedkar: One, he was the architect of the Constitution. And two, he was the leader of Dalits. Of course, he was the emancipator of the downtrodden, but to call him a Dalit leader is erroneous.”
For him, Ambedkar was one of the founding fathers of modern India who contributed immensely in the field of economics, socio-political and religious thoughts, law and, of course, constitution. “To give you a specific example, many people don’t know that he was one of the finest economists of the era, and that most of his degrees barring law were in that subject.”
“As the labour Member of the Viceroy’s Executive Council between 1942 and 1946, Ambedkar was instrumental in bringing about several labour reforms, including establishment of employment exchanges. He got in place a framework for the tripartite settlement of disputes between Government, labour union leaders and employers. He also played an important role in shaping the irrigation policy, especially the Damodar Valley Project on the scale of the Tennessee Valley Project. So, he was a practising economist too. This is one aspect which has not been recognised yet,” says Jadhav, reminding about Ambedkar’s role in the making of the Finance Commission, which gives guidelines on how to devolve resources between the Centre and States. “Do you know that the original source of reference for all the 13 Finance Commission reports, in a way, are based on Ambedkar’s PhD thesis, The Evolution of Provincial Finance in British India, written in 1923IJ We know the outcome, but never give credit to the person,” says he.
Another area where his contribution has gone unsung is in the field of women’s empowerment. “For three-and-a-half years as the first law Minister of Independent India, Ambedkar championed the cause of the Hindu Code Bill and when he couldn’t get it passed, he resigned from the Cabinet,” says the author. What was the Hindu Code BillIJ It was about giving women their rightful place in male-dominated Hindu families. Jadhav is hurt that no one, not even women organisations, recognises Ambedkar’s contribution in this field. “I don’t belittle the role played by Raja Rammohun Roy and others, but Ambedkar’s contribution in the recent past is immense,” says the author.
For Ambedkar, untouchability had two aspects: One, it made others look down upon Dalits; two, Dalits themselves internalised some sort of inferiority complex — they started believing that something was inherently lacking in them! “I believe the most brilliantly managed scam in the history of mankind is the caste system. For centuries, Dalits were made to believe that they must have done terribly wrong in their previous lives for the difficulties they are facing in this one. So, they were exhorted not to challenge the system, but to perform their assigned duties faithfully and expect to be born better in the next life! It was Ambedkar who made Dalits ask a simple question: ‘It may be in the interest of others to be your masters, but why should it be in your interest to be their slavesIJ’ This made them realise that being treated as humans was their rights and not something which could be given to them as handouts,” says Jadhav.
Ambedkar is often charged with co-ordinating with British on the issue of Independence. Jadhav disagrees. “If you look at his speeches, you will find the dilemma he faced: On one hand, he had to take on the British. And on the other, he faced Mahatma Gandhi. At a given time he couldn’t have taken on both of them. Despite seeking separate electorate for Dalits, Ambedkar had the highest interest of the country in mind. So much so that even Gandhi would call him a patriot of the highest order. Thus, in my view, he was taking sides strategically for furthering national development as well as promoting the interest of Dalits.”
The irony, Jadhav says, was that since Gandhi had such an influence over Indians that anyone opposing him would automatically be regarded as a ‘traitor’. And that’s what had happened to Ambedkar. But there was no way he could have agreed to the Mahatma, with the two having contrasting socio-political outlooks. “While Gandhi’s advice to all his followers was to go to villages, Ambedkar wanted them to shift to cities. He believed that since everyone knew everybody in villages, you were expected to perform your duties as per your caste requirements. You can’t perform any other role in a village. Ambedkar knew that going to cities would mean going to anonymity, going to education, going to better job opportunities. There you are not recognised by your caste,” says the author.
The second bone of contention between Gandhi and Ambedkar, says Jadhav, was on the issue of conversion. Ambedkar had announced in 1935 that he was born an untouchable Hindu but he would not die a Hindu. He converted 21 years later, in 1956. In these years he studied different creeds as he wanted to convert to a religion which was consistent with the Indian ethos and at the same time based on equality, liberty and fraternity. “That’s why he chose Buddhism,” says the author. Gandhi vehemently opposed this outlook, saying religion was not like a cloak which one could change at will. He expected people to perform duties traditionally assigned to them. Ambedkar couldn’t have agreed to it.
Ask about Arun Shourie’s Worshipping False Gods, questioning Ambedkar’s role in the making of the Constitution, and Jadhav’s voice gets shriller. “I am appalled at the way Shourie wrote the book. I will pick just two quotes to substantiate my claim. One was by TT Krishnamachari, member of the drafting committee, who went on record to say that out of seven members in the drafting committee, one was constantly abroad, one was ill, others were busy and so couldn’t come regularly, and the entire responsibility came on Ambedkar. Then there was Rajendra Prasad, president of the Constituent Assembly, who profusely praised him for his role in the making of the Constitution, saying they couldn’t have chosen a better person than Ambedkar to do the job.
Jadhav, however, remains optimist about future. “Recently, I was in a slum. There I saw a group of Dalit kids studying under a dimly-lit lantern. There lies the hope. Dalits now know that education alone can empower them. And this is the gift that Ambedkar had given them through his slogan: Educate, organise and agitate.”