Vol. 5 · pages 481–485
Essays on Untouchables and Untouchability
This text was extracted automatically from the official PDF of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, so it may contain small errors. Always check the original page before quoting.
PDF page 481 (printed page 466)
466 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
Missionaries intolerating caste : Dr. Heyne in 1814 wrote :
Missionaries, in many instances, have fallen into a mistake of a
very injurious nature to their rapid or even ultimate success. In
converting a Hindu to Christianity, they oblige him to adopt a line of
conduct by which he loses his caste; this, in India is considered such
a disgrace, that it must present a powerful obstacle to conversion.
But the political division of the Hindus is no part of their religious
tenets, though it has been so mistaken by the most enlightened. In
giving to the Hindus the Christian religion, allow them to retain their
caste, and they could be found to embrace it without reluctance, and
in considerable numbers.” 1
But I do not wish to judge the attitude of the Protestant Missions
to so important a question from so stray a pronouncement of a solitary
individual. There is evidence to show that the Protestant Missions
were once early in their career called upon to make up their mind on
this important issue so that it can be said that the view maintained
by the Protestant Mission is a considered view. The time when this
issue was discussed seriously was the time when Rev. Heber was
appointed the Bishop of Calcutta. He assumed his duties in the year
1823. During his episcopate he toured extensively in the whole of
India and in Ceylon. In the course of his tour, he became aware of
the sharp conflict of opinion among Protestant Missionaries to the
question of toleration of caste among converts. He decided to resolve
this difference. How he went about the business is told in the words
of Mr. Kaye who has succintantly narrated it:
“There was strife, therefore, among the missionaries, which Heber
was anxious to allay. The question had been brought before him,
before he quitted Bengal. He had there sought to arm himself with
all the information that he could obtain, respecting not only the
practice of the earlier Protestant missionaries, but the true nature
of the institution of Caste. There was then in Bishop’s College a
Christian convert, known as Christian David. He had been a pupil
of Schwartz; and was truly a remarkable man. No less distinguished
for his intelligence than for his piety, he was regarded by the good
Bishop as the one of all others to whom he might most expediently
refer for the solution of his doubts. Heber drew up, therefore, a
series of questions, which he submitted to the native Christian, and
received from him a series of replies, stated not only in excellent
English, but with a force and precision which could not be easily
surpassed.
1 Krishna District Manual, p. 282.
PDF page 482
467
THE CONDITION OF THE CONVERT
“First, with regard to the nature of Caste, it was declared by
Christian David, that it was, among the natives of Southern India,
“purely a worldly idea”— “not connected in their minds with any
notion of true or false religion,” that the native converts, drawn
from the higher castes, were disinclined to intercourse With lowcaste proselytes, not on religious or superstitious grounds, but
simply for social reasons; that there were certain distinctions
between high-caste and low-caste persons not by any means ideal,
and that these distinctions were not to be gilded over merely by
the acquisition of worldly wealth. He specially set forth that lowcaste people indulged habitually in an unseemly mode of speech—
frequently using coarse or indecent expressions very revolting
to the feelings of high-caste men; and that they were altogether
less decorous and self respectful in their way of life. Learning,
he said, might elevate them; and if a Pariah became learned he
was called a pundit, and respected by the Church; and then his
brother converts would associate with him, but still they would
not “from worldly fear or pride” eat with him from the same dish.
From the days of Ziegenbalg downwards they had been wont to
sit at Church in two separate divisions, and had communicated
separately at the Lord’s table, drinking out of the same cup, but
the high-caste converts drinking first. As a proof, however, that
these were regarded as merely worldly distinctions, Christian
David said that high-caste and low-caste, among the Christian
congregations of the South, were buried in a common burial
ground, and took part promiscuously in the funeral ceremonies,
“as if with the consciousness, contrary to the heathen nations,
that death levelled all distinctions.”
“Rather by mild remonstrance and persuasion than by the
enactment of any stringent rules, which might have proved great
obstructions to Christianity, the elder missionaries had sought to
mitigate the evil; and Christian David declared that under the
ministration of Schwartz the evil had considerably diminished. But
Mr. Rhenius, of the Church Missionary Society, a truly conscientious
and devout Christian, had taken other views of the duties of
Christian teachers, and had gained over to his opinions the younger
missionaries in the South; so that they agreed, as I have said,
among themselves, to make the total repudiation of Caste, even in
its mere social aspect, an essential condition of admittance to the
Christian Church; and they had, moreover, spoken and preached
against the elder missionaries—even the most venerated of their
predecessors—denouncing them as “corrupters of the Gospel” for
having permitted such things to soil the purity of Christianity.
PDF page 483 (printed page 468)
468 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
Of all this Christian David spoke with profound regret. His own
opinions were naturally inclined towards the doctrine and the
practice of his old master Christian Schwartz. The mild interference
and affectionate advice of the Bishop might, he thought, dispose the
hearts of the younger missionaries towards greater toleration and
forbearance.
“Very earnestly and very conscientiously did Heber revolve this
important subject in his mind. It is in accordance with all that we
know of the character of the man, that he should have inclined
towards the more conciliatory practices of the elder missionaries.
But he deferred any final decision, until the opportunity should
arrive for the collection of further information and the delivery
of a sounder and fuller judgment on the spot. When, therefore,
he visited the Southern Presidency, he wrote letters of inquiry
to some of the principal missionaries and instituted a select
committee of the Christian Knowledge Society for the purpose
of making further investigation into the subject. From one letter
written to the Rev. D. Schrievogel, though little more than a
series of questions, the bent of his opinions may be derived. It
appeared to him, after much deliberate consideration, that Caste,
as represented to exist among the Christian converts on the Coast
was in reality an institution differing little in its essential features
from the social exclusiveness prevailing in Christian countries.
Is there no such thing, he asked himself, as Caste in Europe? Is
there no such thing as Caste in America? Do not the high and the
low sit apart in our English churches ? Do not our well-dressed
high-caste folks go up first to the altar to communicate? Do high
and low sit down to meat together—do their children attend the
same schools? Are there no Pariahs amongst us? In other civilized
countries, is there not a prevailing sense of Caste, apart from all
associations of worldly distinction? Does not the Spanish hidalgo
wear his Caste bravely beneath his threadbare cloak? Is the
wealthiest mulatto fit companion for the poorest white? It may
be called blood, or anything else in another; but in its essential
features the one thing differs but little from the other. It is an
intelligible and appreciable Christian principle that all men in
the sight of God are equal. But it is equally certain that all are
not equal in the sight of Man; and it is a fair presumption that
God never intended them to be equal. Social distinctions exist
every where; and if, argued the Bishop, the distinctions which
exist among the converts on the Southern coast are merely social
distinctions, why should we endanger the success of our efforts
by endeavouring to enforce a law of equality, which is maintained
among no other classes of men?
PDF page 484
469
THE CONDITION OF THE CONVERT
“In this wise thought Bishop Heber. He had said from the first,
that if he could be of any service to the Christian cause in India, it
would be as a moderator—that by a conciliatory course, smoothing
down the asperities of the over-zealship, he might hope to do much
good as the chief missionary; and now he believed that it was his
duty to cast in the weight of his authority upon the side of those who
had resolved not to. pour too much of new wine into the old bottles.”
This view was more forcefully expressed by another Protestant
Missionary Rev. Robert Noble who came out to India in 1841 and was
in charge of the Church of England Mission Work in Masulipatam made
it a rule to exclude Pariahs, leather workers and scavengers from his
school. Defending himself against the charge of introducing caste in the
Christian fold he defended himself in the following terms: “The humblest
and most pious Christian parents in England would not allow their sons,
much less their daughters, to be educated with their footmen, with their
cooks and their scullery maids. Perhaps I was punished oftener by my
pious father for stealing away to play with the boys of the village than
on any other account; while in the best ordered Christian family I have
ever seen, the children were not allowed to converse with the servants or
to descend the second step of the stairs into the kitchen. My father would
not have allowed us to mix with the” cook’s or stable boy’s children; nor
can I see it right to require of Brahmins that before we will teach them
the Gospel, they must sit down on the same form with the pariah and
the sweeper. The requirement is to me unreasonable and unchristian.”
It is true that many wise and devout Christians since Heber’s time
believed that he was altogether wrong; and that Bishop Wilson at a
later period reversed his decision emphatically pronouncing against all
toleration for the inequities of caste on the ground that it was an ingrained
part of Hindu religion. But the fact remained not only the official but
also the general view of the Protest Missions’ in India regarding the
place of caste in Indian Christianity.
Thus all Missionaries agreed that Christianity should be made easy
in order that it may spread among India. On this point there seems
to be difference of kind among Catholics, Lutherners or Protestants.
Such difference as exists is one of degree. If there exists Caste and
other forms among Christian converts it is the result of this policy—
1An exception must however be made in favour of the Protestant Missionaries of
America. In July 1847 the American Missionaries passed the following resolution regarding
this question—
“That the Mission regards caste as an essential part of heathenism, and
its full and practical renunciation, after instruction, as essential to satisfactory
evidence of piety: and that renunciation of caste implies at least readiness to
eat. under proper circumstances, with Christians of any caste.”,
PDF page 485 (printed page 470)
470 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
policy of making Christianity easy. In adopting this policy the
Missionaries never thought that some day, somebody would ask them
‘What good is Christianity for a Hindu if it does not do away with his
Caste’. They misunderstood their mission and thought that making
a person Christian was the same thing as making him a follower of
Christ.
V
Let us take the second part of the question. Has Christianity been
able to save the convert from the sufferings and the ignominy which
is the misfortune of every one who is born an untouchable? Can an
untouchable after his conversion to Christianity take water from a
public well? Are his children admitted to a public school? Can he
enter a hotel or tavern which was not open to him ? Can he enter
a shop and buy things from inside? Will a barber shave him? Will
a washerman wash his clothes? Can he travel in a bus? Will he be
admitted in Public offices without compunction ? Will he be allowed
to live in the touchable quarters of the village? Will the Hindus take
water from him ? Will they dine with him ? Will not the Hindu take
a bath if he touches him ? I am sure the answer to every one of these
questions must be in the negative. In other words conversion has not
brought about any change in the social status of the untouchable
convert. To the general mass of the Hindus the untouchable remains
an untouchable even though he beomes a Christian.
The question is, why has Christianity not succeeded in raising
the status of the untouchable convert? What are the reasons for this
failure? I am not sure that my reasons will be accepted by all those
who are interested in the problem. But I will state them for what
they are worth. To understand and appreciate what I am going to
say I must begin by pointing out that a change in the social status
of the convert Can be the result of a two-fold change. There must
be a change in the attitude of the Hindus. Secondly there must be
a change in the mentality of the convert. Status is a dual matter, a
matter inter se between two persons and unless both move from their
old position there can be no change. What has been done by those
who are in charge of Christian endeavour to make the parties move
on? A consideration of this question will enable us to understand why
Christianity has failed to raise the status of the untouchable convert.
Let us consider the question in parts. What has Christianity done to
make the Hindus move on? I find they have done nothing. They seem
to be depending upon an idea doing the miracle. The faith in an idea