Vol. 17, Part I · pages 276–280

251CONVERSION MOVEMENTS..........MOTIVE I am trying to serve my people. Mr. Rajah has been opposing me and finding fault with my work. At the same time he has developed the art of self-advertisement through the medium of newspapers. I do not attach much importance to this question but I fail to understand why the movement to renounce Hinduism and the desire on the part of the Untouchable masses to embrace any other religion launched by them should hurt Mr. Rajah ? If Mr. Rajah does not want to renounce the Hindu religion, nobody will force him to do so and for this reason he has no right to comment on it. Mr. Rajah says, “I will live as a Hindu and die as a Hindu.” He is quite free to do so. But 1 would like to tell him one thing, that in making use of his proficiency in issuing statements to press, he has been exhibiting his love for the Hindu religion but until he converts himself to some other religion he will continue to live as a ‘Pariah’ and die as a ‘Pariah’. He must bear in mind the fact that the stigma of Untouchability attached to him due to his caste is not likely to be effaced even a bit if he continues to remain within the Hindu fold. It is nonsensical to say that conversion should be done only for spiritual reasons. I would like to ask Mr. Rajah whether it is only for the reasons ‘spiritual’ that he wants to remain within the fold of Hinduism. If he has no ambition other than spiritual satisfaction why should he bother about the material and political benefits accruing from the reservation of seats in the legislature ? If he is so keen on living as a Hindu and dying as a Hindu, why does he aspire for reserved seats ? Mr. Gandhi and Mr. Malaviya, I believe, have no moral courage to say anything against the conversion of the Untouchables. They have failed to honour the promises they had made at the time of signing the Poona Pact. Mr. Gandhi says that he has failed to understand my stand; I would also say that it is difficult for me to understand his language and action. According to him, ‘upliftment of Untouchables is an independent question’. If this kind of language which is used by Gandhiji is used by one saint or another, perhaps, he can comprehend it better, but for an ordinary mortal like me, who is governed by ordinary principles of society in everyday life, this Mahatmatic language of Gandhi has no meaning. Gandhi says that religion is

252 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES not a commodity to be bartered. My reply is that it is not fair on the part of Gandhi to give expression to this kind of view at this distant date. At the time of the Poona Pact, Mr. Gandhi himself accepted the principle of give and take. Gone are the days when those who are struggling for achieving the basic human rights to satisfy their hunger and ordinary basic needs like bread and water could be hood-winked to live, merely for attaining spiritual peace. Gandhi says that the Untouchables are bartering away their religion, but he must bear in mind that the conversion movement has not been launched with any selfish motive or for any personal benefit. According to Gandhi, ‘Hindus should do (repentance) prayschit themselves and voluntarily endeavour to eradicate Untouchability. Untouchables themselves need not do anything for the removal of Untouchability and their own upliftment. The Untouchables should simply sit with folded hands and pray, ‘O’ ! Lord, grant the Hindus wisdom, and courage, and light, so that they may be forgiven for their evil deeds. Let their sins be forgiven and grant them the knowledge and strength to reform their society.’ This is the pious advice of Gandhiji to the Untouchables. These pious platitudes can do no good to anybody, nor can they solve any problems. No sane person can ever agree to such a proposal. This sounds more like the advice tendered by an idiot to the people living in an area effected by a plague epidemic. “Brothers, halt and listen to me ! Do not be afraid of the disease. The Municipal Committee members will have to repent one day for the dereliction of duty on their part; some plan will surely be chalked out for the eradication of the plague. Meanwhile, you must wait and see. Do not be in a hurry to leave home and hearth.” Whatever wisdom you find in this advice, the same kind of advice has been tendered by Gandhi to the Untouchables in his statements. Shri Rajagopalachari, it seems, has another fit of anger. This aged house-holder has developed a kind of indigestion owing to excessive use of acidic explitives which he is in the habit of coining. He has labelled this conversion movement as ‘satanic.’ If the Untouchables have been seriously thinking of embracing Sikhism, the followers of Hinduism should think for themselves and decide whether this step on the part of the Untouchables is

253CONVERSION MOVEMENTS..........MOTIVE really satanic. I feel that those Hindus who feel concerned about the future of Hinduism must be wondering whether this great Hindu Brahmin Rajagopalachari, is really a man out of his senses to call conversion to Sikhism ‘satanic.’ In fact, if this accusation of being ‘satanic’ is to be levelled against any person, it is Dr. Moonje who without any respect for propriety published the personal and confidential correspondence. But I do not wish to say any more on this subject. Shankaracharya Dr. Kurtakoti, and other prominent Hindu leaders have favoured the idea of Untouchables embracing Sikhism. In fact, it is these leaders who have propagated the idea of Untouchables embracing Sikhism... and also prevailed on me to do so. I fell for the idea mainly because I too feel I have some responsibility towards the future of Hindu culture and civilisation. Hindus are free to decide, after reading my views about the correspondence published in the newspapers, whether the policy decided by Mr. Gandhi, Mr. Rajah and Mr. Rajagopalachari about the conversion of the Untouchables to Sikhism is of the advantage to Hindu Society or not. zz Statement of Dr. Ambedkar published in the Janata (Marathi) dated 15th August 1936.

14 THE INDEPENDENT LABOUR PARTY : A SOURCE FOR BETTERMENT OF THE DEPRESSED CLASSES On 14th January 1937, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar reached Bombay from London. The Journalist from Times of India had interviewed Dr. Ambedkar. The interview is as follows : Editors. Dr. Ambedkar said that he visited Europe purely for reasons of health and he stayed most of the time in Vienna and Berlin. He was in London only for a week. He had no conversation of a political nature with any one in London. Asked if he had come to any decision regarding his intention to leave the Hindu fold, he said that the decision still remained, although he had not finally made up his mind which new faith he should embrace. Dr. Ambedkar said that his immediate concern was the ensuing elections to the Bombay Legislative Assembly and he would devote himself to the election campaign. The Independent Labour Party, which he had started, would work for the betterment of the political and social condition of the Depressed Classes in the Legislature, and he was sanguine that all the candidates put up on behalf of his Party would come out successful in the elections. Dr. Ambedkar was given a rousing reception on arrival. More than a thousand Khaki-clad volunteers belonging to the Social Equity League lined up the entire route from Ballard Pier Station to Alexandra Dock No. 18, cheered him as he passed. Most of the candidates put up by the Independent Labour Party of which Dr. Ambedkar is the founder, for the ensuing elections to the Bombay Legislative Assembly were present on the wharf to meet him. Among them were B. K. Gaikwad (Nashik District), Mr. PrabhakarRoham (Ahmednagar), Mr. B. H. Varale (Belgaum), Mr. R. R. Bhole (Poona), Mr. B. J. Sawadkar, Mr. S. G. Tipnis (Kolaba), Mr. G. R. Ghatge (Ratanagiri), Mr. R. E. Bhatankar (Thana) and Mr. V. A. Gadkari. 1 zz 1 : The Times of India, dated 15th January 1937 Reprinted : Khairmode, Vol. 7, Pp. 57-59.

15 CIVIL LIBERTIES OF INDIANS “It is interesting that for him Untouchability and exploitation were a violation of civil liberties, not in the conventional sense, but because of the breach of the dignity of whole communities. His reply to the Secretary of the Civil Liberties Union, Dr. K. B. Menon, way back in June 1937, makes meaningful reading ; Bhimrao R. Ambedkar ‘Rajgriha’ M.A., Ph.D.,D.Sc, Dadar, Bombay - 14 Barrister-at-Law. 8th June 1937 Dear Mr. Menon, I am in receipt of your letter No. 998 of the 19th of May 1937 and also your post card asking me to sign the manifesto, on behalf of the Indian Civil Liberties Union to be read as a message from India at the conference on civil liberties in India to be held in London. I did not know of your letter till I came to Bombay on the 25th May, and hence could not reply to it earlier. I have read the manifesto and I am sorry I cannot subscribe to it. You have condemned the Frontier Policy of the Government of India. I do not see how it can be a matter of Civil Liberties of Indians. On the other hand, you make no mention of the systematic tyranny and oppression practised by Caste Hindus against the Untouchables, which is undoubtedly a matter of Civil Liberties of Indians. Yours Sincerely, B. R. Ambedkar.” 1 zz 1 Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer, Exordium P. VII.