Vol. 17, Part I · pages 216–220

191KALARAM TEMPLE................ENTRY MOVEMENT and prohibited people coming from near the Kala Ram Temple. I do not know if this order contemplates the prevention of our Satyagrahis from sitting at the temple doors as they have been doing heretofore. I most respectfully submit to Your Excellency that there is a chance (I use this word advisedly as I do not know the opinion of the Satyagraha Committee) of this order being respected only if the District Magistrate gives an assurance that the temple doors will remain closed during the period stated in his order and that the private door of the Priest will not remain open to the public. As I have made clear in my last letter, the fight is between touchables and the Untouchables and I have no desire to bring the latter into the conflict with the Government. I am anxious to have an interview with Your Excellency to discuss the situation personally and if Your Excellency is inclined to grant one I am available till 2 p.m. tomorrow. Awaiting the favour of Your Excellency’s early reply, I remain, Your Excellency’s Most Obedient Servant, Sd/- B. R. Ambedkar.” 1 ---------- “Win Freedom By Your Own Efforts” Dr. Ambedkar’s Advice to Trichur People Calicut, June 17, 1931. Dr. Ambedkar of Bombay in the course of a letter to the organiser of the Temple Entry Satyagraha, Trichur, says “Would advise you not to depend upon Congress help. It won’t help you in this matter. Its help would not redound to your credit. Want our people win freedom by their own efforts.” 2 1: Khairmode, Vol. 3; Pp. 323-328. 2: The Bombay Chronicle, dated 18th June 1931.

192 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES “Dr. AMBEDKAR’S ADVICE Nothing could be more natural on the part of Doctor Ambedkar than to suggest that the organisers of the Temple Entry Satyagraha at Trichur should not take the help of the Congress in their campaign. For, otherwise, the task of misrepresenting the Congress would be rendered still more difficult. And then, secondly, one cannot be expected to surrender one’s “ raison d’etre ”. Doctor Ambedkar’s letter is nothing mope than a very intelligible struggle for existence. Blessings to Nasik Satyagrahis From London Bombay, November 2, 1931 The General Secretary, Nasik Temple Entry Satyagraha Committee, has received the following message from Dr. Ambedkar from London :— “I regret very much not to have been able to write to you in reply to the letter you sent me some time ago containing the interview you had with the Commissioner. I have been so much taken up with the question of minorities which as you know has become much more difficult owing to the attitude of Mr. Gandhi that I have had no minute to spare :— As anticipated by you I did get a letter from the Commissioner C. D. asking me to advise you people to stop the Nasik Satyagraha. I have not replied to him but I am going to do so by this mail. I am going to tell him that we cannot stop. So you may tell our people to go on. We must hot take our orders from the Government just as we must not take them from the Orthodox Hindus. We have trusted Government long enough We have trusted the Government long enough to remove “Untouchability”. But it has not lifted its finger to do anything in the matter and it has no right to ask us to stop. We must take the burden on our shoulders and do what we can to free ourselves from this course at any cost. If the Government does not help us, it must not at least hamper our just cause. It is no use telling us that we must not create ill-feeling between different classes and communities. This appeal by Government should be addressed to all the communities and not to us alone. It should specially be addressed to those communities who are in the wrong and who are sinning in the matter.

193KALARAM TEMPLE................ENTRY MOVEMENT “My people don’t need me” You may publish a translation of this in handbills and broadcast them among our people. I have been reading the telegrams regarding the struggle at Mukhed between our people and the castemen. I am glad to find that our people are prepared at all costs to carry on the fight to a success. I congratulate them on their splendid resolve. I see that you are starting Satyagraha on the 5th November. I hope you have made the best preparation. I am sorry. I am not there to help you. But I know that our people are now alive to their problem and that they do not need me every time.—A.P.” 1 The situation prevailing in Nasik during the Satyagraha was reported in the Times of India as follows : Editors. “No Right to bathe in the Sacred Kunds, Nasik enduring decisions against Untouchables. (From our Correspondent.) Nasik, June 6, 1932. ‘On the whole I believe that Untouchables have neither the right to approach the four Kunds (bathing pools) nor to bathe in them. Therefore, under Section 147 (3) of the Cr. P. Code, I hereby prohibit all Mahars, Mangs, Chamars, Dheds, Bhangis and other Untouchables from exercising their alleged right of proceeding to and bathing in Lakshmana, Dhanushya, Ram and Sita Kunds, until they obtain from a Civil Court an order entitling them to bathe there.’ Thus observes Mr. L. N. Brown, District Magistrate of Nasik in the order passed today in connection with the inquiry instituted into the dispute between the Sanatanists and Untouchables in which the latter claim the right to proceed to and bathe in the Sacred Kunds. Dealing with the question of Irish Bridge Sandhwa located near the Ram Kund, the Magistrate says that it appeared that this Sandhwa is used by the pilgrims doing the Pradakshina (a religious ceremony) or the Sacred Kunds. Its use as a thoroughfare is secondary. It is, I think, a fair deduction from the evidence 1: The Bombay Chronicle, dated 3rd November 1931.

194 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES that respectably dressed Christians and Mahomedans have been allowed to cross the Sandhwa. But this evidence is not strictly relevent to the present case which is concerned with the rights of Untouchable Hindus. It has not been proved that Hindu Untouchables have any right to use this Sandhwa.’ 1 When the Temple-Entry-Satyagraha was going on a move was forced to get the temple-entry legalised by the Government. The background of the issue is as follows : The Temple-entry movement in India received a setback when the Courts of law held that entry in the temples by the Untouchables was illegal being against the established custom. Such judicial pronouncements turned out to be stumbling blocks in the way of social reform undertaken by Mahatma Gandhs. Against this backdrop efforts were afoot to bring about legislation to overcome that barrier. Therefore, several Bills were intended to be introduced in the Central Legislature as well as the Provincial Legislatures. Of the bills mentioned above, the most important were those of Dr. Subbaroyan’s Temple-Entry Bill and Ranga Iyer’s Untouchability Abolition Bill. Dr. Subbaroyan’s Temple-Entry Bill was intended to undo the wrong done by the Courts of Law and sought to amend the Madras Religious Endowments Act. The Bill, however, was approved by the Sanatoria Hindus prominent of them being Pandit Madan Malaviya, Konda Venkatappaiah and S.T. Ramanuja Iyengar, Srinivasa Iyengar. However, Dr. Subbaroyan’s Temple-Entry Bill in the Madras Council was refused permission on the ground that it was far-reaching in implication for enactment by a Provincial Legislature. Afterwards Ranga Iyer drafted a second Bill based on Dr. Subbaroyan’s which the Viceroy permitted to introduce it in the Central Assembly, subject to the same qualification as in the case of his forerun Bill. His Excellency Lord Wellington the Viceroy, for its introduction in the Central Legislative Assembly subject to the condition that the Government of India did not commit themselves to accepting its principles and that the fullest opportunity would be given to every section of the Hindu Community to express an 1: The Times of India. 7-6-1932, Reprinted, Khairmode, Vol. 3; Pp. 351-352.

195KALARAM TEMPLE................ENTRY MOVEMENT opinion on its provisions. Mahatma Gandhi pleaded with the Viceroy by his letter dated February 1, 1933 that the Government of India was bound to support these two Legislative measures in view of the Resolution dated September 25, 1932 passed by the Caste Hindus at Bombay which formed part of the Poona Pact. Mahatma Gandhi saw that the Ranga Iyer’s Bill should be supported by everyone. He sent out an appeal to the Hindu Members of the Central Legislative Assembly. He utilised the services of C. Rajagopalachari, who, according to him, was ‘a better lobbyist’, to enlist support for the Bills. He advised him not to take to heart, “Dr. Ambedkar’s explosion, the Government’s decision and Malaviya’s opposition.” G. D. Birla and Devdas Gandhi were appointed to canvass support for the Bills. When the Bills had come to the stage of appointment of a Select Committee, the British Government had taken a decision to dissolve the Assembly and order election. Terrified at the thought of facing the electorate, there was a sudden volte-face on the part of the members who favoured the Bills. The mover of the Bills Ranga Iyer was deeply hurt and came up heavily on C. Rajagopalachari stating that he had gone back “like a crab”. He added: “Had they gone on with the TempleEntry Bill or the Untouchable question, they would have lost many votes, for it is not a popular issue and, therefore, “they have run away for their own convictions and playing every trick to come back to the Legislature with as large a number as possible.” Against this background, two great stalwarts-Mahatma Gandhi and Babasaheb Ambedkar-met at Yeravada Prison on February 4, 1933. (For the details of the meeting between Dr. Ambedkar and Gandhiji see Section II under the title “Dr. AmbedkarMahatma Gandhi Meetings.—Editors.) After this meeting Dr. B. R. Ambedkar issued a statement wherein he expressed his views regarding the Temple Entry Bill. Following is the statement: Statement on Temple Entry Bill 14th February, 1933 “What was the attitude of the Untouchables to this movement for Temple entry ? I was asked by Mr. Gandhi to lend my