This is with ref. to Debate on “Jati identity”. Dr. Ambedkar had tried his best to annihilate Hindu castes and their caste system before embracing Buddhism. But once he embraced Buddhism, he never talked about Hindu castes and their caste system. And hence we the followers of our emancipator, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, have nothing to do with the Hindus or castes.
Editor’s thesis: Now, the question is what about our existing caste and sub-castes? The answer is exactly as the DV Editor thinks i.e., separate but equal.
I am proud of my caste and | am sure that others 100 would be proud of their castes. That means caste destruction is totally impossible. How would it be possible when each one is proud of his/her caste? On the contrary, caste consolidation is taking peace in a big way. And this is what the Editor is also saying. We should work on his thesis of caste consolidation. But many of us fear that such a caste consolidation would harm the Dalit unity.
How then to achieve Dalit unity? In my view all the current Debates on “Dalit unity” is meaningless. The Editor is correct when he says that unity comes out of crisis. But the unity that comes out of crisis cannot stay for long due to its inherent nature. When the crisis is over, people feel free and they may break it. There is another argument that “political unity” must be first and socio-religious unity will have to wait. Politics is a game of chance. It is just like a storm. Politics being a game of numbers it is very unstable. And hence any positive construction cannot be done through this. To say that “political unity first” and once that is achieved, and once we become rulers, religious and social unity will follow is also doubtful.
Constitution based on Buddhism: if we want social change, religious unity is more important. it is religion alone that can bring social change in India. Our emancipator has studied all these aspects and at last he followed Buddhism. He studied the Indian politics for a long time. To get our human rights, he introduced democratic principles in the Indian Constitution. But to unite us, he gave Buddhism which is based on the principles of equality, liberty and fraternity. In fact, the democratic principles of our Constitution are derived from Buddhism. In India, people are so religious that they cannot live without a religion. Religion is the master-key of unity. People treat it as the question of their life and death. And that is why Dr. Ambedkar chose religion for “Dalit unity”.
Religion to rule people’s heart: No doubt, politics has power through which you might get success to bring ‘physical changes. But you can’t change people’s heart. To rule over the people’s heart, you have to follow a religion. And this type of a cultural change is sure to be stable without shedding a drop of blood. Dr. Ambedkar has studied all these and after badly defeated from Hindu caste and their caste system, he embraced “Buddhism.
Endorsing Dr. Jamaad’s plea, our Editor says that religious and social unity is more important. This could not be achieved because Babasaheb died soon after becoming a Buddhist and his drive to constitute the entire Dalits into a single community through Buddhism came to an abrupt end. Dalit leaders who followed him were corrupted and coopted and Babasaheb’s dream of achieving the religious and social unity of Dalits failed (DV June 1,’97).
Babasaheb followed Buddhism deliberately, consciously keeping the Dalit interests in mind. He took 20 years to study all these and finding no alternative, he followed Buddhism. But the Editor says Babasaheb died soon after becoming a Buddhist. Does it mean we should not pay attention to Buddhism. Or does it mean Babasaheb was on wrong side?
If this is Sc, we Buddhists, the followers of our messiah all over India, request the Editor to pardon us. Why not the Editor give a call to all the Dalits to embrace Buddhism? If we all Dalits follow Buddhism, where is the question of disunity among us? Why not we channelise all our energy on this and take mass conversion 1o Buddhism?
