The term “Untouchables” is applied to a wide range of outcaste groups in India. The Govt. calls them Harijans or SCs. From centuries they had been doing certain traditional duties involving polluting activities.
Some of the Untouchables were concerned with removing of dead cattle or tanning their hides. They ate the flesh of cattle and pigs, [were] subjected to many social restrictions, segregated outside village limits, forbidden from entering temples, denied schooling, barred from drawing water from wells. They cannot wear upper garments or footwear, cannot touch higher castes. Social cruelties and oppression of Untouchables are limitless and unimaginable. J. H. Hutton says a Nayar might safely approach a Brahmin within a few feet but could not touch him without defiling him. The presence of Tiya toddy-tapper was enough to pollute a Brahmin at a distance of 36 paces, and that of a Pulayan at no less than 96 paces. At Triunelveli, there was a caste whose occupation was to wash the clothes of the Untouchables. This caste was condemned to remain as the unseeable and thus to live a nocturnal existence. These Untouchables and unseeables, who had suffered for ages social, even spatial immobility and suppression at the hands of the Hindus are, of course clubbed in Hinduism and also called Hindus. But alas! socially betrayed, injured, condemned and outlawed. Social reformers have given only a compromise formula to eradicate untouchability. Their approach is reformist. They never advocated the abolition of caste as a prerequisite to remove untouchability. They don’t question the sacred authority of the Shastras and Puranas which perpetuate and protect the caste and untouchability. The social reformers advocated, after all, the removal of caste differences only, not the total and unconditional abolition of caste. To this class of social reformers belongs Gandhi, who said untouchability is not sanctioned by religion, but a device of Satan. Gandhi cites the example of his mother who became untouchable temporarily every time she handled unclean things and hence had to cleanse herself by bathing. So, his argument is that such untouchability, as is recognised by religion is, by its very nature transitory – easily removable and referable to the deed, not the doer. He condemns the practice of untouchability but not the institution. He defends Varnashrama as a healthy division of work based on birth. Caste is purely a question of duty. In support, he quotes the Gita. He even vindicates Manu Smriti as being not responsible for the practice of untouchability. He did not want to antagonise the upper caste Hindus. In spite of Gandhi’s compromising technique, the Hindu orthodoxy did not spare his life mission. From the soft-pedalling Gandhism to the revolutionary approach of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar and Periyar EVR. Ambedkar was born of an Untouchable. He was denied the opportunity of studying Sanskrit. But later he mastered it. He burnt the Manu Smriti publicly in 1927. He never agreed with Gandhi. He abhorred the use of the term Harijan and hence moved a Bill in the Bombay Legislative Assembly to withdraw the term from official use. Ambedkar was always strong in his views like Periyar. He was determined to regain rights only by struggle. In one conference, exactly like Periyar, Ambedkar rebuked and ridiculed his people in order to arouse them to action. He said : “The appearance of Tulasi leaves around your neck will not relieve you from the clutches of the money-lenders. Because you sing the songs of Ramayan, you do not get a concession in rent from landlord””. In an article, he was brutally atheistic and argued in a down to earth fashion. He wrote: “You must abolish your slavery by yourselves. Don’t depend for its abolition upon God or superman. Pilgrimages cannot give salvation”. Thus, the writings, speeches and dialogues of Ambedkar were as frank and fiery as Peryar’s. To fulfil his vow not to die a Hindu, he embraced Buddhism in 1956 along with 6 lakhs Untouchables, in spite of Periyar’s persuasion to fight from within, not leaving Hinduism. Ambedkar did not realise that conversion to Buddhism could not be a remedy to untouchability. Periyar was an atheist and a social revolutionary. In his school days, he moved with low-caste boys much against the advice of his parents and teachers. With self-acquired knowledge in Vedas, Shastras and Puranas, he questioned their authority and sanctity. He attacked tradition, orthodoxy and superstitions. He turned his heavy artillery against religion, god and scriptures. His conviction was that untouchability cannot be removed unless the Varnashrama Dharma, Hinduism, faith in a multitude of gods and Brahmanism are abolished. He advocated atheistic and social revolution. According to Periyar, the sudras & panchamas should fight against Varnashrama and Hinduism for the removal of social stigma attached to their birth. Human dignity, that is, self-respect for man, was Periyar’s message. In a series of Self-respect conferences since 1929, a call was given to the sudras and panchamas to refuse to practice religion and shastras which were responsible for Varnashrama. He conducted a series a depressed classes conference. The self-respect movement and later Dravida Kazagam brought under the single banner lakhs of sudras and panchamas. His leadership in Vaikom satyagraha forced the authorities to permit Untouchables in Vaikom streets. He advocated the abolition of caste through proportional communal representation in all walks of life. Due to his relentless struggle, the first amendment to the Constitution guaranteed reservation for the backward classes. His campaign against caste boards in restaurants, burning the portraits of Rama and breaking the idol of Vigneswara were demonstrative of social and atheistic revolution. He conducted a conference at Madras in 1973 for starting an agitation to amend the Constitution so that caste could be abolished in law and also for providing opportunities for the sudras and panchamas to become temple archakas. This is a message and mission of Periyar, yet to be fulfilled.
