You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.66 AVERAGE
4.66 AVERAGE
Honestly, what could I say here that would be worth saying? Any critiques would only be nitpicking. Breathtaking, and essential for India.
challenging
informative
slow-paced
Perfect book to wrap up monthly read. I was always sort of intimidated by this book but the language was so easy and it's around 100 pages if you just read the original text.
The way Dr Ambedkar has talked about caste and how it can't be annihilated without annihilating the religion makes perfect sense. This book will offend half the Indian population and that in itself speaks about the brillince of the essay.
The way Dr Ambedkar has talked about caste and how it can't be annihilated without annihilating the religion makes perfect sense. This book will offend half the Indian population and that in itself speaks about the brillince of the essay.
challenging
informative
reflective
A contrast in dynamics, in perspective and in outlook of the world. One, from the lowest strata of society, who had to fight every second to make his voice heard, the other, a well-privileged saint, supported by industrialist giants, whose daily activities were published on radios. Both have faced different experiences and different struggles, but the question this book invokes, who had the best interest of the underprivileged, the outcast, the Untouchables?
Ambedkar had presented his views on caste, with scholarly research on its origins, the Brahminism associated in each section of the caste, of how hierarchy remains unbreakable. He calls caste as a multi-storied house, which has no doors to enter or exit on each level. Which is apt, as endogamy is practised, even today.
He questions Vedas, Shastras, and Smritis, which has been propagating the Varna system since the birth of Hinduism. And the ultimate power residing in the hands of intellectuals, and warriors, who can wield swords and words, but not to the Dalits, who are isolated, and treated with disdain for their work concerned only in cleaning the latrines of the above castes, scavenging roads, and performing lowly labours for the above caste members, but not owning land, or wielding swords, or learning to become intellectuals. Not that they hadn't tried, but they aren't supposed to read, write, own land, or wear jewels, or proper clothes.
This is what Ambedkar wanted to break. Break and dismantle caste from India, as even among the Dalits, there are castes, where one caste is considered superior to the other. Which for him, even with all the constitutional efforts and strict laws, gets difficult, as each caste forms a strong fraternity and there exists no scenario of inter-marriage, so to speak.
On the other hand, we see Gandhi, a privileged elite who propagates for caste, which he had considered the reasoning of India's ultimate existence for centuries. Although he preaches against untouchability, he doesn't want to break caste-system. This point of Gandhi puts him in a complicated position, so as to question what he truly knew about the struggle of the oppressed, or that of women, or that of village, when he wanted to represent himself for the entire nation. His stand gets weaker, when he blackmailed to kill himself by not supporting Communal Award for the Dalits, even though this is what the Dalits needed, to actually gain a respectable place amongst the masses.
Ambedkar, on the other hand, worked vigorously in doing his maximum part to contribute in making the constitution, organising and preaching against the caste system. However, it is also hard not to question Ambedkar's reasoning to abandon Hinduism, as a whole, where his points get weaker, with him praising Islam and Christianity. And his harsh remarks on Indians calling them as pygmies or his casteist remarks on the Adivasis.
One must also understand that, Ambekar, could be analysed, cross-analysed, discussed and accused, in his ideas and words, but the truth remains that Gandhi had been liberated of all and any remarks or questions due to the Mahatma status, that he was bestowed upon.
Ambedkar had presented his views on caste, with scholarly research on its origins, the Brahminism associated in each section of the caste, of how hierarchy remains unbreakable. He calls caste as a multi-storied house, which has no doors to enter or exit on each level. Which is apt, as endogamy is practised, even today.
He questions Vedas, Shastras, and Smritis, which has been propagating the Varna system since the birth of Hinduism. And the ultimate power residing in the hands of intellectuals, and warriors, who can wield swords and words, but not to the Dalits, who are isolated, and treated with disdain for their work concerned only in cleaning the latrines of the above castes, scavenging roads, and performing lowly labours for the above caste members, but not owning land, or wielding swords, or learning to become intellectuals. Not that they hadn't tried, but they aren't supposed to read, write, own land, or wear jewels, or proper clothes.
This is what Ambedkar wanted to break. Break and dismantle caste from India, as even among the Dalits, there are castes, where one caste is considered superior to the other. Which for him, even with all the constitutional efforts and strict laws, gets difficult, as each caste forms a strong fraternity and there exists no scenario of inter-marriage, so to speak.
On the other hand, we see Gandhi, a privileged elite who propagates for caste, which he had considered the reasoning of India's ultimate existence for centuries. Although he preaches against untouchability, he doesn't want to break caste-system. This point of Gandhi puts him in a complicated position, so as to question what he truly knew about the struggle of the oppressed, or that of women, or that of village, when he wanted to represent himself for the entire nation. His stand gets weaker, when he blackmailed to kill himself by not supporting Communal Award for the Dalits, even though this is what the Dalits needed, to actually gain a respectable place amongst the masses.
Ambedkar, on the other hand, worked vigorously in doing his maximum part to contribute in making the constitution, organising and preaching against the caste system. However, it is also hard not to question Ambedkar's reasoning to abandon Hinduism, as a whole, where his points get weaker, with him praising Islam and Christianity. And his harsh remarks on Indians calling them as pygmies or his casteist remarks on the Adivasis.
One must also understand that, Ambekar, could be analysed, cross-analysed, discussed and accused, in his ideas and words, but the truth remains that Gandhi had been liberated of all and any remarks or questions due to the Mahatma status, that he was bestowed upon.
Dr. Ambedkar was an expert and much ahead of his times. This book is a shining example of all that and his gripping, scathing writing style.
It was a stray remark in the famous Quad of Presidency College- always bustling with conversations, cards and chai; that introduced me to The Annihilation of Caste. I had recently been made aware of my own privilege of being a savarna Hindu and Dr. Ambedkar's text was an acute revelation. I have read it once more since then, for a better understanding of the text and I remain in its awe. This review is not about The Annihilation of Caste. It is about the controversial introduction by Arundhati Roy.
Although named The Doctor and the Saint, it is more about Gandhi than Ambedkar. Roy dares to uncover the disappointing and sometimes simply opportunistic views of the most revered man in this country. She does it skillfully, equipped with immaculately researched facts and logic- much like the Doctor himself. The feud between the two titans is brought to the fore and I winced with each of the blows Roy rains on Gandhi. Being born in a generation that has the luxury to objectively look at the heroes of the Indian independence from a lens of objectivity, I have been somewhat skeptical of Gandhi. This text adds to that skepticism- no man should be deified. Praised and applauded and revered-yes. But not deified and worshiped-that's what fascists do. I would probably not recommend this text for those who are not very familiar to the Indian history, but it gives an excellent perspective on how complex caste politics really has been and how the caste Hindus have used it to their advantage over and over again (specially, to someone like me who has been a beneficiary of upper caste privilege in many, many ways.)
I could also see why the controversy around it arose- but I would rather that you discover it on your own. Roy's own identity and pro-maoist stance does come in the way of reading the text at times and I am aware of the irony that the introduction was written by an upper caste author. However, as Ambedkar said, "Freedom of mind is the real freedom." It would be an even greater irony and a disservice to Ambedkar, to not read an introduction of The Annihilation of Caste because of the author's caste.
For those of you who are interested in the debate that ensued between Rajmohan Gandhi, Roy and Nandini Oza, you can read it on EPW Engage here. (Rajmohan Gandhi penned a response to this text in 2015 which was followed by responses from Roy and Nandini Oza. They were followed by Gandhi's subsequent rejoinder to these responses.)
Although named The Doctor and the Saint, it is more about Gandhi than Ambedkar. Roy dares to uncover the disappointing and sometimes simply opportunistic views of the most revered man in this country. She does it skillfully, equipped with immaculately researched facts and logic- much like the Doctor himself. The feud between the two titans is brought to the fore and I winced with each of the blows Roy rains on Gandhi. Being born in a generation that has the luxury to objectively look at the heroes of the Indian independence from a lens of objectivity, I have been somewhat skeptical of Gandhi. This text adds to that skepticism- no man should be deified. Praised and applauded and revered-yes. But not deified and worshiped-that's what fascists do. I would probably not recommend this text for those who are not very familiar to the Indian history, but it gives an excellent perspective on how complex caste politics really has been and how the caste Hindus have used it to their advantage over and over again (specially, to someone like me who has been a beneficiary of upper caste privilege in many, many ways.)
I could also see why the controversy around it arose- but I would rather that you discover it on your own. Roy's own identity and pro-maoist stance does come in the way of reading the text at times and I am aware of the irony that the introduction was written by an upper caste author. However, as Ambedkar said, "Freedom of mind is the real freedom." It would be an even greater irony and a disservice to Ambedkar, to not read an introduction of The Annihilation of Caste because of the author's caste.
For those of you who are interested in the debate that ensued between Rajmohan Gandhi, Roy and Nandini Oza, you can read it on EPW Engage here. (Rajmohan Gandhi penned a response to this text in 2015 which was followed by responses from Roy and Nandini Oza. They were followed by Gandhi's subsequent rejoinder to these responses.)
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
tense
medium-paced
How can you not admire the depth of Ambedkar’s thoughts? Ideas backed by powerful facts and a fair vision is an admired radicalism, no matter what one’s beliefs are and something that is a rarity in the times we live in.
“Once you clear the minds of the people of this misconception and enable them to realize that what they are told is religion is not religion, but that it is law, you will be in a position to urge its amendment or abolition.”
Caste has always wondered me. Why should we have to oppress or disallow a specific group of people? Why are they considered untouchables & treated worst? Or why are they even not considered humans enough?
Through his Annihilation of Caste, Ambedkar criticizes the Hindu Vedas and the principles on which the system of caste is built. A person is born in a specific Hindu Caste and he or she is assigned with that caste. The only way to annihilate the caste and avoid the myriad problems it creates is to destroy the religious system that facilitates discrimination and oppression.
“You must not only discard the Shastras, but you must also deny their authority, as did Buddha and Nanak. You must have the courage to tell the Hindus that what is wrong with them is their religion—the religion which has produced in them this notion of the sacredness of Caste. Will you show that courage?”
According to him, unless and until there is no social reform that binds society together, there is no political and economic reform as both these factors are also related to religion and caste. For eg: we have seen enough political parties in India using religions as their weapons. Also, people are categorised into various varna or caste according to their occupation that directly relates to their economic status.
Annihilation of caste was originally supposed to be a speech that Ambedkar was to deliver at the conference organized by Jat Pat Todak Samaj. Founded in 1922, it was an Anti caste organization that pledged to be responsible for bringing about reforms by methods like Intercaste Dining, Intercaste marriages, etc. But on prior reception of this speech, members of Jat Pat Todak Samaj demanded certain changes which Ambedkar denied doing. And hence, he self-published this speech and tried bringing the reform.
In this profound work, Ambedkar rationally explains why annihilation of caste is necessary. He logically presents arguments and you will get agreed without a second thought. Ambedkar is, undoubtedly, a scholar and this work shows how intelligent, brave, and the reasoned person he was.
Caste has always wondered me. Why should we have to oppress or disallow a specific group of people? Why are they considered untouchables & treated worst? Or why are they even not considered humans enough?
Through his Annihilation of Caste, Ambedkar criticizes the Hindu Vedas and the principles on which the system of caste is built. A person is born in a specific Hindu Caste and he or she is assigned with that caste. The only way to annihilate the caste and avoid the myriad problems it creates is to destroy the religious system that facilitates discrimination and oppression.
“You must not only discard the Shastras, but you must also deny their authority, as did Buddha and Nanak. You must have the courage to tell the Hindus that what is wrong with them is their religion—the religion which has produced in them this notion of the sacredness of Caste. Will you show that courage?”
According to him, unless and until there is no social reform that binds society together, there is no political and economic reform as both these factors are also related to religion and caste. For eg: we have seen enough political parties in India using religions as their weapons. Also, people are categorised into various varna or caste according to their occupation that directly relates to their economic status.
Annihilation of caste was originally supposed to be a speech that Ambedkar was to deliver at the conference organized by Jat Pat Todak Samaj. Founded in 1922, it was an Anti caste organization that pledged to be responsible for bringing about reforms by methods like Intercaste Dining, Intercaste marriages, etc. But on prior reception of this speech, members of Jat Pat Todak Samaj demanded certain changes which Ambedkar denied doing. And hence, he self-published this speech and tried bringing the reform.
In this profound work, Ambedkar rationally explains why annihilation of caste is necessary. He logically presents arguments and you will get agreed without a second thought. Ambedkar is, undoubtedly, a scholar and this work shows how intelligent, brave, and the reasoned person he was.