A victim of Obscurantism and Barbarous Intolerance- B.R.
Ambedkar
-M.O.Mathai , Private Secretary to
Nehru
Through a friend of mine, P.K.
Panikar, who was a Sanskrit scholar and deeply religious, B.R. Ambedkar became
interested in me. I had told Panikar about my admiration for Ambedkar, but
added he just fell short of being a great man by inches because he could not
wholly rise above bitterness. However, I said that no one had any right to
blame him, having regard to the humiliations and indignities he had to suffer
throughout his life. Panikar, who was a frequent visitor to Ambedkar, obviously
reported all this to him. On a Sunday morning Ambedkar rang me up and asked me
to tea that evening. He said he had asked Panikar also. I turned up at the
appointed time.
After the pleasantries, Ambedkar
told me good-humouredly, “So you have found fault with me, but I am prepared to
accept your criticism.” Then he talked about untouchability. He said that the
railways and factories had done more to combat untouchability problem than
Gandhi’s campaigns. He asserted that the real problem of untouchables was
economic and not “temple entry ,”as advocated by Gandhi.
Ambedkar said, “Our Constitution
will, no doubt, abolish untouchability on paper; but it will remain in India as
a virus for at least a hundred years. It is deeply embedded in the minds of
people.” He recalled the abolition of slavery in the United States and said,”
The improvement of the condition of the Negroes is slow even after 150 years.”
I said I couldn’t agree with him more and told the story of my mother. Despite
almost 2000 years of Christianity behind her, she practiced untouchability with
as much conviction as Pandit Madan Mohan Malviya. She would not allow a Harijan
to draw water from our well in summer when water was generally scarce. She
would rush for bath if an untouchable came within twenty feet of her.
Then Ambedkar said with pride,
“The Hindus wanted the Vedas, and they sent for Vyasa who was not a caste
Hindu. The Hindus wanted an epic and they sent for Valmiki who was an
untouchable. The Hindus want a Constitution and they have sent for me.” He said,
“The greatest tragedy of the Hindi belt in India is that the people of the
region discarded Valmiki and installed Tulsidas.” He expressed the view that
the people of this vast region will remain backward and obscurantist until they
replace Tulsidas by Valmiki. He reminded me that, according to the Valmiki Ramayana,
“when Rama and Lakshmana arrived at the ashrama of Bhardwaja, the sage
assembled a few flattened calves for Rama to choose from to be slaughtered for
the feast. So Rama and his entourage were fed on veal; Tulsidas cut out all
this.” I told him that Vatsayana, in his Kama Sutra, has prescribed that young
couples should be fed on veal for six months before marriage.
Ambedkar pointed out his finger
at me and said, “You Malayalis have done the greatest harm to this country.” I
was taken aback and asked him how. He said, “You sent that man Shankracharya, a
dessicated expert in logic, on a padyatra (walking tour) to the north to drive
away Buddhism from this country.” Ambedkar added that the Buddha was the
greatest soul India had ever produced. He also said that the greatest man India
produced in recent centuries was not Gandhi bur Swami Vivekanada.
I reminded Ambedkar that, “it was
Gandhi who suggested to Nehru to invite you to join the government.” That was news
to him. I amended my statement by saying that the idea struck Gandhi and Nehru
simultaneously. It was Ambedkar who piloted the Constitution Bill in the
Constituent assembly.
Ambedkar confided in me that he
had decided to become a Buddhist and to advise his followers to do likewise.
Until he left Delhi, Ambedkar
kept in touch with me. He was a remarkable man who richly deserves the salute
of the India people.
M.O.Mathai, “Reminiscences of the
Nehru Age”-1978, Vikas Publishing House Pvt Ltd, New Delhi, pp:24-25
