III
Shri Sant Ramji of the Jat-Pat-Todak
Mandal of Lahore wants me to publish the following: " I have read your remarks about Dr. Ambedkar and the Jat-Pat-Todak
Mandal, Lahore. In that
connection I beg to submit as follows :
" We did not
invite Dr. Ambedkar
to preside over our conference because he belonged to the Depressed Classes,
for we do not distinguish between a touchable and
an untouchable Hindu. On the contrary our choice fell on him simply because his
diagnosis of the fatal disease of the Hindu community was the same as ours, i.e. he too was of the opinion that
caste system was the root cause of the disruption and downfall of the Hindus.
The subject of the Doctor's thesis for Doctorate being caste system, he has
studied the subject thoroughly. Now the object of our conference was to
persuade the Hindus to annihilate castes but the advice of a non-Hindu in
social and religious matters can have no effect on them. The Doctor in the
supplementary portion of his address insisted on saying that that was his last
speech as a Hindu, which was irrelevant as well as pernicious to the interests
of the conference. So we requested him to expunge that sentence for he could
easily say the same thing on any other occasion. But he refused and we saw no
utility in making merely a show of our function. In spite of all this, I cannot
help praising his address which is, as far as I know, the most learned thesis
on the subject and worth translating into every vernacular of India.
Moreover, I want to bring to your notice that your philosophical difference between Caste and Varna
is too subtle to be grasped by people in general,
because for all practical purposes in the Hindu society Caste and Varna are one and the same thing, for
the function of both of them is one and the same i.e. to restrict inter-caste marriages
and inter-dining. Your theory of Varnavyavastha
is impracticable in this age and there is no hope of its revival in the near
future. But Hindus are slaves of caste and do not want to destroy it. So when
you advocate your ideal of imaginary Varnavyavastha
they find justification for clinging to caste. Thus you are doing a great
disservice to social reform by advocating your imaginary utility of division of
Varnas,
for it creates hindrance in our way. To try to remove untouchability
without striking at the root of Varnavyavastha
is simply to treat the outward symptoms of a disease or
to draw a line on the surface of water. As in the heart of their hearts dvijas do
not want to give social equality to the so-called touchable
and untouchable Shudras, so they refuse to break
caste, and give liberal donations for the removal of untouchability,
simply to evade the issue. To seek the help of the Shastras for the removal of
untouchability and caste is simply to wash mud with mud."
The last
paragraph of the letter surely cancels the first. If the Mandal rejects the help of the Shastras, they do exactly what Dr. Ambedkar
does, i.e. cease to be Hindus. How
then can they object to Dr. Ambedkar's address
merely because he said that that was his last
speech as a Hindu ? The position appears to be
wholly untenable especially when the Mandal, for which Shri Sant Ram claims to
speak, applauds the whole argument of Dr. Ambedkar's address.
But it is
pertinent to ask what the Mandal believes if it rejects the Shastras. How can a Muslim remain one if
he rejects the Quran ,or
a Christian remain Christian if he rejects the Bible ?
If Caste and Varna are convertible
terms and if Varna
is an integral part of the Shastras
which define Hinduism, I do not know how a person who rejects Caste i.e. Varna can call himself a Hindu.
Shri Sant Ram
likens the Shastras to mud. Dr. Ambedkar
has not, so far as I remember, given any such
picturesque name to the Shastras. I
have certainly meant when I have said that if Shastras support the existing untouchability I should cease to call
myself a Hindu. Similarly, if the Shastras
support caste as we know it today in all its hideousness, I may not call myself
or remain a Hindu since I have no scruples about interdining or intermarriage.
I need not repeat my position regarding Shastras
and their interpretation. I venture to suggest to Shri Sant Ram that it is the
only rational and correct and morally defensible position and it has ample
warrant in Hindu tradition.
(Harijan, August 15,1936)
Comments
Social Counter