Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.66 AVERAGE
4.66 AVERAGE
I first read Dr. Ambedkar's essay a few years back when I had just started thinking about caste and how it is important to acknowledge caste exists and working to dismantle it, instead of sweeping it under the rug of poverty alleviation.
In the years between the first read to now, I have sharpened my own thinking. Had numerous discussions (often acrimonious ones) with Ambedkarites who speak glibly about "destruction of Hinduism" without getting into how they propose to do it, or what they will replace Hinduism with. I have witnessed Amebdkarites lock horns with Communists and as a keen but dispassionate observer seen how each calls the other casteist for approaching the issue of casteism from different directions (I also saw how at Gail Omvedt's funeral, chants of "Jai Bheem" and "Lal Salam" were raised in tandem). Above all, I have seen how everyone who quotes AoC seems to have no clue about how to go about doing what they want to do.
I picked up the "Annihilation of Caste: with a reply to Mahatma Gandhi" with the full weight of expectations on it. I had already internalised the issues relating to caste privilege and of how relative economic affluence does not necessarily translate into lack of social oppression. I had no doubt that "....the real method of breaking up the Caste System was not to bring about inter-caste dinners and inter-caste marriages but to destroy the religious notions on which Caste was founded". I recognise that what is needed is "social reform in the sense of the reorganization and reconstruction of the Hindu Society". What I really expected from the book was the "how". How does one bring about the destruction of a practice sanctioned by religion.
Alas, no solutions were offered. Dr Ambedkar says, and rightly that "To ask people to give up Caste is to ask them to go contrary to their fundamental religious notions." Since caste system is a hierarchy in which the divisions of labourers are graded one above the other, when people seek the annihilation of caste, they stand to lose as much as they gain. There is a great incentive for preserving the status quo, especially since to get out of that, you need to take on the entire nation.
Dr. Ambedkar calls for the "ancient rules of life be annulled" and that "its place ... be taken by a Religion of Principles, which alone can lay claim to being a true Religion." Drawing a distinction between principles and rules, he rightly points out that "the principle may be wrong but the act is conscious and responsible. The rule may be right but the act is mechanical. A religious act may not be a correct act but must at least be a responsible act."
However, he leaves it at that. He urges Hindus to take on the task of overthrowing the religion which has too many inflexible and inhuman rules, and replacing it with "a society based on Liberty, Equality and Fraternity." But he doesn't tell us how to make that happen.
In the context of 1936, and given the fact that the address was to be made to a society which was working towards annihilation of caste, the fact that he doesn't offer solutions doesn't matter. What is disappointing is that today the work is selectively quoted, and his vague calls for action are offered as solutions. Which they are not. I felt let down because the book did not address what I sought.
There was a long analysis on the order in which political reforms, economic reforms and social reforms could take place. How a person addresses that question depends on where they stand. Someone from a privileged social position will prioritise political reforms since that affects them most deeply. But post-Independence history has shown that unless one continues demanding social reform after attaining political reform, it gets missed out. In the context of today, in my opinion, since the prevailing political ideology is making the social menace worse, political reforms will need to be dealt with on priority.
If you are looking to learn about the caste system, and why it should be weeded out completely, this is the book for you. However, if you want answers to questions you are already asking, you may be disappointed because he too is asking those same questions. I would have still given the book five stars- that the author offers no solutions does not in any way take away from the phenomenal work done by him in explaining the intricacies of the caste system.
The reason I gave the book only 4 stars was because I did not find him a totally unbiased observer. For example, a lot of what Dr. Ambedkar said about Hinduism holds equally true for all religions. Almost all religions are dogmatic, almost all religions discourage reasoning, almost all religions are a collection of static rules. Yet, only Hinduism was singled out for criticism. Since it was about the caste system, I can understand why that might be so. However, in other sections of the book, Hinduism was compared to other religions and found wanting. Since they were brought up as a contrast, for the sake of neutrality, they should have been mentioned in other contexts too. Either keep it about one religion only or criticise all- selectiveness shows a marked bias.
In the years between the first read to now, I have sharpened my own thinking. Had numerous discussions (often acrimonious ones) with Ambedkarites who speak glibly about "destruction of Hinduism" without getting into how they propose to do it, or what they will replace Hinduism with. I have witnessed Amebdkarites lock horns with Communists and as a keen but dispassionate observer seen how each calls the other casteist for approaching the issue of casteism from different directions (I also saw how at Gail Omvedt's funeral, chants of "Jai Bheem" and "Lal Salam" were raised in tandem). Above all, I have seen how everyone who quotes AoC seems to have no clue about how to go about doing what they want to do.
I picked up the "Annihilation of Caste: with a reply to Mahatma Gandhi" with the full weight of expectations on it. I had already internalised the issues relating to caste privilege and of how relative economic affluence does not necessarily translate into lack of social oppression. I had no doubt that "....the real method of breaking up the Caste System was not to bring about inter-caste dinners and inter-caste marriages but to destroy the religious notions on which Caste was founded". I recognise that what is needed is "social reform in the sense of the reorganization and reconstruction of the Hindu Society". What I really expected from the book was the "how". How does one bring about the destruction of a practice sanctioned by religion.
Alas, no solutions were offered. Dr Ambedkar says, and rightly that "To ask people to give up Caste is to ask them to go contrary to their fundamental religious notions." Since caste system is a hierarchy in which the divisions of labourers are graded one above the other, when people seek the annihilation of caste, they stand to lose as much as they gain. There is a great incentive for preserving the status quo, especially since to get out of that, you need to take on the entire nation.
Dr. Ambedkar calls for the "ancient rules of life be annulled" and that "its place ... be taken by a Religion of Principles, which alone can lay claim to being a true Religion." Drawing a distinction between principles and rules, he rightly points out that "the principle may be wrong but the act is conscious and responsible. The rule may be right but the act is mechanical. A religious act may not be a correct act but must at least be a responsible act."
However, he leaves it at that. He urges Hindus to take on the task of overthrowing the religion which has too many inflexible and inhuman rules, and replacing it with "a society based on Liberty, Equality and Fraternity." But he doesn't tell us how to make that happen.
In the context of 1936, and given the fact that the address was to be made to a society which was working towards annihilation of caste, the fact that he doesn't offer solutions doesn't matter. What is disappointing is that today the work is selectively quoted, and his vague calls for action are offered as solutions. Which they are not. I felt let down because the book did not address what I sought.
There was a long analysis on the order in which political reforms, economic reforms and social reforms could take place. How a person addresses that question depends on where they stand. Someone from a privileged social position will prioritise political reforms since that affects them most deeply. But post-Independence history has shown that unless one continues demanding social reform after attaining political reform, it gets missed out. In the context of today, in my opinion, since the prevailing political ideology is making the social menace worse, political reforms will need to be dealt with on priority.
If you are looking to learn about the caste system, and why it should be weeded out completely, this is the book for you. However, if you want answers to questions you are already asking, you may be disappointed because he too is asking those same questions. I would have still given the book five stars- that the author offers no solutions does not in any way take away from the phenomenal work done by him in explaining the intricacies of the caste system.
The reason I gave the book only 4 stars was because I did not find him a totally unbiased observer. For example, a lot of what Dr. Ambedkar said about Hinduism holds equally true for all religions. Almost all religions are dogmatic, almost all religions discourage reasoning, almost all religions are a collection of static rules. Yet, only Hinduism was singled out for criticism. Since it was about the caste system, I can understand why that might be so. However, in other sections of the book, Hinduism was compared to other religions and found wanting. Since they were brought up as a contrast, for the sake of neutrality, they should have been mentioned in other contexts too. Either keep it about one religion only or criticise all- selectiveness shows a marked bias.
informative
reflective
Annihilation of Caste is a speech that Dr. BR Ambedkar is planning to give at the annual conference of the Jaat Pat Todak Mandal (Society for the Break up of Caste System) arguing for the complete annihilation of caste. The society does not want to raise the ire of the orthodox Hindus and decides to cancel the conference entirely in order to avoid the ire of the orthodox Hindus. Dr. Ambedkar is put in the position where he has to publish the book using his own money.
To most upper caste urban people, it would appear as if the caste system is already abolished and we live in a pure meritocracy. It is often the case that such wealthy urbanites benefit not only from wealth in the form of financial support from their parents but also the social capital that comes from being in a higher caste. Caste in India marks all people into different tribes and a person risks excommunication should they decide to break their caste. Dr. Ambedkar clearly lays out all of the effects that this system has on the workings of Indian society. He even makes a prediction that, if the caste system is not destroyed its many mischiefs and evils will spread around the world. A New York Times report speaks of a large temple complex built by lower caste labourers who were paid a paltry wage of just 1 dollar per hour. It speaks to Dr. Ambedkar's genius that he should have seen this coming nearly 100 years ago.
Upper caste people benefit daily from the social and financial capital of their caste whether they realise it or not. Its important to read up on and understand this system.
To most upper caste urban people, it would appear as if the caste system is already abolished and we live in a pure meritocracy. It is often the case that such wealthy urbanites benefit not only from wealth in the form of financial support from their parents but also the social capital that comes from being in a higher caste. Caste in India marks all people into different tribes and a person risks excommunication should they decide to break their caste. Dr. Ambedkar clearly lays out all of the effects that this system has on the workings of Indian society. He even makes a prediction that, if the caste system is not destroyed its many mischiefs and evils will spread around the world. A New York Times report speaks of a large temple complex built by lower caste labourers who were paid a paltry wage of just 1 dollar per hour. It speaks to Dr. Ambedkar's genius that he should have seen this coming nearly 100 years ago.
Upper caste people benefit daily from the social and financial capital of their caste whether they realise it or not. Its important to read up on and understand this system.
Annihilation of Caste is Dr. Ambedkar's undelivered speech that was considered too blasphemous by the Jat-Pat Todak Mandal's mostly privileged caste Hindu organizers for their annual conference in 1935. Ambedkar provides a scathing indictment of the sacred texts of Hinduism (most prominently the Manusmriti) and how privileged caste Hindus religiously cling to them as a defense to maintain the social hierarchy established by the caste system. The power the higher castes hold is sustained through the social and economic oppression and resulting inhumane treatment that is inflicted on the Dalits, to this day. But unlike race, caste is invisible and yet all pervading. Ambedkar proposes questioning the sanctity of these texts as one of the major solutions to social reform and implores people to not be passive observers but to become more conscious thinkers, especially since our practices forces million of people to lead deplorable lives.
A friend had remarked that he finds Ambedkar to be too critical of the Hindu religion. I am also reminded of how my parents would often emphasize that they don't see caste. But having read about the instances of gruesome caste discrimination in the 1930s presented by Ambedkar and the present day atrocious crimes against Dalits cited by Arundhati Roy in the introduction, I am severely disturbed and forced to acknowledge my privilege of never having to think about my caste. Because my caste and seemingly entangled class has not disadvantaged me in any aspect of life. But Ambedkar was embittered by his cruel experiences and I think that justifies his decision to not die as a Hindu even though he was born as one.
I can't stress enough how critical this piece of work is, it has really shaken my view of the Hindu society (read also Indian society as caste even permeates the boundaries of religion in our country). It must be read, at least to understand that privileged caste experiences are not universal, to burst that comfortable bubble of reality we have lived in so far. That should be a good start?
I have also come to realize that the only two times, the privileged caste-Hindus and especially the politicians care about Dalits is either for Votes or when they want to convert to another religion in the hope of escaping the tyranny of the caste system (*coughs Hindu nationalists *). So it doesn't come as a surprise how seemingly both the left and right have assimilated Ambedkar as someone to be proud of. Or as Roy says in the introduction, 'as junior partner to Gandhi in their joint fight against untouchability'. And ah coming to the larger than life Mahatma!, how brutally Arundhati Roy strips him of his saintly title. She breaks down the tailored version of Gandhi's life in South Africa that we have been raised on. Gandhi's own writings are referenced to display his stubbornness in continuing to exult the merits of the caste system and his disdain for any Dalits trying to free themselves from the shackles of the lowly professions prescribed for their caste. She also presents a good overview of Ambedkar's desperate efforts to obtain political rights and representation for his caste members and how he died with the disappointment of the compromises he was browbeaten to make.
I still feel conflicted about Gandhi and would like to read more of the other side. However above all, Arundhati Roy makes it abundantly clear that Gandhi may not be a saint but was a good politician with all his contradictions and craftiness. And despite his erudition and formidable intellect, Ambedkar wasn't. And yet I believe Ambedkar's life itself was the most radical act.
A friend had remarked that he finds Ambedkar to be too critical of the Hindu religion. I am also reminded of how my parents would often emphasize that they don't see caste. But having read about the instances of gruesome caste discrimination in the 1930s presented by Ambedkar and the present day atrocious crimes against Dalits cited by Arundhati Roy in the introduction, I am severely disturbed and forced to acknowledge my privilege of never having to think about my caste. Because my caste and seemingly entangled class has not disadvantaged me in any aspect of life. But Ambedkar was embittered by his cruel experiences and I think that justifies his decision to not die as a Hindu even though he was born as one.
I can't stress enough how critical this piece of work is, it has really shaken my view of the Hindu society (read also Indian society as caste even permeates the boundaries of religion in our country). It must be read, at least to understand that privileged caste experiences are not universal, to burst that comfortable bubble of reality we have lived in so far. That should be a good start?
I have also come to realize that the only two times, the privileged caste-Hindus and especially the politicians care about Dalits is either for Votes or when they want to convert to another religion in the hope of escaping the tyranny of the caste system (*coughs Hindu nationalists *). So it doesn't come as a surprise how seemingly both the left and right have assimilated Ambedkar as someone to be proud of. Or as Roy says in the introduction, 'as junior partner to Gandhi in their joint fight against untouchability'. And ah coming to the larger than life Mahatma!, how brutally Arundhati Roy strips him of his saintly title. She breaks down the tailored version of Gandhi's life in South Africa that we have been raised on. Gandhi's own writings are referenced to display his stubbornness in continuing to exult the merits of the caste system and his disdain for any Dalits trying to free themselves from the shackles of the lowly professions prescribed for their caste. She also presents a good overview of Ambedkar's desperate efforts to obtain political rights and representation for his caste members and how he died with the disappointment of the compromises he was browbeaten to make.
I still feel conflicted about Gandhi and would like to read more of the other side. However above all, Arundhati Roy makes it abundantly clear that Gandhi may not be a saint but was a good politician with all his contradictions and craftiness. And despite his erudition and formidable intellect, Ambedkar wasn't. And yet I believe Ambedkar's life itself was the most radical act.
A Radical book based on the speech which Ambedkar was supposed to give in Lahore but was cancelled due to the contents.
The book begins with an introduction by Arundhati Roy which she examines Gandhi and Ambedkar and sets the context. This section has to be taken with a huge pinch of salt.
The crux is what follows where first the letters between the Mandal and Ambedkar are shared followed by the speeech. Ambedkar starts by saying that political and economic reforms are not possible without social reforms first. HE quotes various historical instances including the Plebs in Rome. He then states his arguments against the chaturvarnya system and points out the various impacts of caste. He closes by asking for reforms and reorganization in Hindu religion since that would be the only way to get rid of the caste system.
The book also has Gandhi's arguments against and Ambedkar's response to the arguments.
This should be required reading for all people in India to give a perspective and provide some food for thought.
The book begins with an introduction by Arundhati Roy which she examines Gandhi and Ambedkar and sets the context. This section has to be taken with a huge pinch of salt.
The crux is what follows where first the letters between the Mandal and Ambedkar are shared followed by the speeech. Ambedkar starts by saying that political and economic reforms are not possible without social reforms first. HE quotes various historical instances including the Plebs in Rome. He then states his arguments against the chaturvarnya system and points out the various impacts of caste. He closes by asking for reforms and reorganization in Hindu religion since that would be the only way to get rid of the caste system.
The book also has Gandhi's arguments against and Ambedkar's response to the arguments.
This should be required reading for all people in India to give a perspective and provide some food for thought.
S.Anand's annotations are thorough and are essential to understand Ambedkar's stance on the Varna system. Arundhati roy's introductory chapter also allows the reader to place Gandhi and Ambedkar as people rather than the 'ideal people' that they are made to be by their respective followers. A must read for those who have been pondering about the caste system in India.
a brilliant, precise indictment of the caste system, and super helpful in understanding modi's hindu nationalist politics in india, especially re: the situation in kashmir
this book made me aware of the toxic idea called the Hindu caste system - an arrangement that has made it impossible for Hindus to build a society based on liberty, equality and fraternity.
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced