How Ambedkar and Gandhi's contrasting views paved way for caste reservation

The caste survey released by the Bihar government has ignited a fresh debate on the caste-politics dynamics in India. The caste system has been a subject of intense political debate and reform efforts. From the British era to the Mandal versus Kamandal politics, caste has been central to the socio-political narrative of mainland India.

Two prominent figures who have significantly contributed to this discourse are Mahatma Gandhi, Father of the Nation, and Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, Father of the Constitution. The two stalwarts of Indian politics, while revered equally by the public, had contrasting views on the caste system. Their subsequent debates have shaped the course of Indian society and politics.

While Gandhi denounced untouchability, he did not condemn the varna system, a social hierarchy based on occupation, for most of his life. He believed in reforming the caste system through the abolition of untouchability and by giving equal status to each occupation.

On the other hand, BR Ambedkar, a Dalit himself, argued that the caste system disorganised and "demoralised Hindu society, reducing it to a collection of castes". Ambedkar denounced the Vedas and scriptures, believing that the caste system and untouchability were manifestations of Hindu religious scriptures. He first articulated caste inequality in Indian society and worked for the "annihilation of caste", believing that anything built on caste would inevitably create inequality.

Their clashing views were on full display when the Poona Pact was signed in 1932. Gandhi's unrelenting fast forced Ambedkar to bend and let go of his desire to have a separate electoral process for the depressed classes, Dalits in particular. And yet, despite their differences, they developed an understanding to work for the betterment of the marginalised.

GANDHI'S OPPOSITION TO SEPARATE ELECTORATE FOR DALITS

The 1930s were a tumultuous time in India's history. The struggle for independence from British colonial rule was at its peak, and the Indian National Congress, led by Mahatma Gandhi, was the predominant political force. However, alongside the fight for independence, another critical issue needed addressing -— the demand for political representation and safeguards for the Dalits.

BR Ambedkar, a brilliant jurist and social reformer, emerged as a prominent voice for the Dalits. He believed that a separate electoral process for Dalits was essential to ensure their political representation and protect their interests in legislative bodies. Gandhi, on the other hand, was totally opposed to the idea of a separate electoral process, fearing it would perpetuate divisions among Indians.

In 1930, the British government initiated the Round Table Conferences to address the issue of representation for different religious and social groups in India. After prolonged negotiations at the second Round Table Conference, the British government, on August 15, 1932, formalised a separate electoral process -- for Muslims, Sikhs and Dalits.

Under the proposed process, only members from particular communities would be eligible to vote and elect a representative to legislative assemblies.

The idea of separate electorates for the Dalits was supported by Ambedkar but vehemently opposed by Gandhi. The Mahatma believed that creating a separate electorate for the depressed classes would further fragment Indian society along religious and caste lines. He also believed that the British were trying to inject "poison that is calculated to destroy Hinduism".

In a letter to then British Prime Minister Ramsay McDonald on September 9, Gandhi wrote, "I should not be against even over-representation of the Depressed Classes. What I am against is their statutory separation, even in a limited form, from the Hindu fold, so long as they choose to belong to it. Do you realize that if your decision stands and the Constitution comes into being, you arrest the marvellous growth of the work of Hindu reformers, who have dedicated themselves to the uplift of their suppressed brethren in every walk of life?"

To pressurise the British and the Congress into abandoning the idea of separate electorates, Gandhi, who was then lodged in Yerwada Central Jail in Pune on sedition charges, started a fast unto death on September 20, 1932.

GANDHI'S FAST UNTO DEATH

Ambedkar was miffed by Gandhi's fast. He was unwilling to "sacrifice a rightful demand" for Gandhi's sake, especially when no alternative proposal was presented at the Round Table.

However, pressure soon began mounting on Ambedkar. Newspapers ran daily bulletins on Gandhi's deteriorating health and Congressmen flocked to Ambedkar to agree to Gandhi's demands.

A committee, representing upper castes and including Sir Tejbahadur Sapru, barrister MR Jayakar, Pandit Madan Mohan Malviya, Mathuradas Wasanji, was formed to have negotiations with Ambedkar on Gandhi's behalf.

In the meeting, Chunnilal put forward the following views on behalf of Mahatma Gandhi before the committee members. As per Chunnilal, Mahatma Gandhi was not only opposed to the awarding of separate electorates for the Dalits, he was also not fully agreeable to reserving seats.

In response, Ambedkar stood defiant and said, "Today in the negotiations in this difficult situation, I am in more strange position than all others. Unfortunately, in these peaceful negotiations, I appear to be acting as villain for the protection of just demands of my people. I am willing to suffer to any extent in order to get fulfilled the just demands of my people."

He further said, "I tell you I shall not deter from my pious duty, and betray the just and legitimate interests of my people even if you hang me on the nearest lamp-post in the street..."

GANDHI'S SON APPEALS, AMBEDKAR RELENTS

The pressure on Ambedkar was immense. Major newspapers were backing Gandhi, and Ambedkar received several death threats too.

The situation reached a critical point when Devadas Gandhi, Mahatma Gandhi's son, burst into the negotiations, saying, “Father is sinking". Devadas Gandhi pleaded before Ambedkar with tears in his eyes.

Eventually, Ambedkar relented after his friend and Tamil leader, MC Rajah, pointed out that Dalits would face insurmountable prejudice if they were seen as not having come to a compromise for Gandhi’s life.

As per Volume 9 of Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Writings and Speeches, the Dalit leader admitted that it was a "baffling situation" for him.

"I had to make a choice between two different alternatives. There was before me the duty, which I owed as a part of common humanity, to save Gandhi from sure death. There was before me the problem of saving for the Untouchables the political rights which the Prime Minister had given them. I responded to the call of humanity and saved the life of Mr Gandhi by agreeing to alter the Communal Award in a manner satisfactory to Mr Gandhi," Ambedkar said.

The Poona Pact was finally signed at 5 pm on September 24 by 23 people. Madan Mohan Malaviya signed it on behalf of Hindus and Gandhi, and Ambedkar on behalf of the depressed classes. Instead of separate electorates, the pact introduced the concept of reserved seats for the Dalits in provincial and central legislative bodies. These reserved seats were to be filled through a joint electorate system, where all communities would vote together.

The Poona Pact also stipulated that in constituencies reserved for Dalits, only Dalit candidates could contest. However, in other general constituencies, Dalit voters could choose to vote for candidates of their choice from any community.

AMBEDKAR'S PERSPECTIVE ON GANDHI AFTER POONA PACT

After signing the Poona Pact, Ambedkar had mixed feelings about Gandhi. He recognised that the pact did provide some political representation for Dalits, albeit not to the extent he initially demanded with separate electorates. Ambedkar acknowledged that Gandhi's fast had created immense pressure and had forced the issue to a resolution.

However, Ambedkar also criticised Gandhi for his uncompromising stance against separate electorates, which he believed would have been a more effective way to secure political rights for Dalits. He felt that the Poona Pact did not go far enough in addressing the social and economic injustices faced by the Dalits and was a compromise driven by political expediency.

However, the Poona Pact marked a crucial turning point in Indian politics by rejecting separate electorates and introducing the concept of reserved seats, ensuring political representation for marginalized communities, particularly Dalits. This agreement laid the foundation for the development of India's reservation system, which has since been expanded to include various communities to promote social justice and equality.

The principles of the Poona Pact were later enshrined in the Government of India Act, 1935, and the Indian Constitution, which was adopted in 1950. Article 46 of the Constitution calls for the promotion of the educational and economic interests of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and other weaker sections.

UNDERSTANDING AMID DIFFERENCES

Shortly after the signing of the Poona Pact, Ambedkar visited Gandhi on October 17, 1932, and urged him to end his civil disobedience and join the Round Table Conference.

The discourse, though, again turned towards caste as Ambedkar laid bare the struggles Dalits had to face on a daily basis. Ambedkar told Gandhi about his own struggles.

"You may not know what even I have to face. I do not get any other place to live in Bombay except the Port Trust chawl. In my village, I have to stay in the midst of the Mahars. In Poona, all others stay with their friends. I have to stay at the National Hotel and have to spend Rs 7 and transport fare," Ambedkar told Gandhi.

Gandhi at once stood up with Ambedkar. "I am at one with you. You ought to know that my fast has not ended yet, it is still on. To correct the agreement was a minor thing. The main thing still remains to be done. I am ready to give my life for it. All the injustices you mention ought to end," Gandhi told Ambedkar.

Despite their contrasting views on the caste system, both Gandhi and Ambedkar valued each other. Both leaders were united in their commitment to social justice and equality, and this left an indelible mark on Indian society and its electoral process.