In one of his most widely acclaimed works, the Annihilation of Caste, the ‘Doctor’ who fought throughout his life against the ‘saints’, diagnosed Hindu society’s ‘type-caste’ malaise. What makes this text all the more relevant today is that this is popularly described as Ambedkar’s “last words as a Hindu” — for he embraced Buddhism shortly after.?

Today, this sickness has manifested itself by dimming the country’s prospects in nation-building and citizens’ welfare, political empowerment?and liberation, along with economic advancement.

Caste: A gateway to anti-sociality?

Perhaps the most lethal symptom of casteism, according to Ambedkar, was the “anti-social spirit” it inculcated amongst its believers. In this regard, Ambedkar proclaimed that “Hindu society is a myth” for the simple reason that by earmarking the individual’s realm of action through an entrenched caste consciousness, which comes to be periodically reinforced by restrictions on inter-dining, strict dress codes, and mandatory caste endogamy, caste has created inviolable and artificial demarcations in Hindu society.

The Doctor describes this condition as incurable where an ideal Hindu is taught to function “like a rat living in his own hole, refusing to have any contact with others”. This tendency has fomented a chronic malady of caste oppression exemplified by nerve-wrecking incidents that come back to haunt our collective conscience.

The most recent blot spilled on it was on October 8 in Karnataka, when a coffee estate owner, Jagadeesha Gowda, along with his son Tilak, held over a dozen Dalit women captive, subjecting them to severe verbal and physical abuse. A pregnant 20-year-old woman amongst those locked up suffered a miscarriage after the suspects assaulted her, according to NDTV.

Such instances of caste-based violence are not only gruesome but also abundant, with data from the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) indicating that more than 50,000 caste-linked atrocities were recorded in 2021, a marked increase from the year before, with Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, and Odisha accounting for more than 70 per cent of such cases.

This anti-social spirit amongst caste-believers and practitioners is a deep-rooted malaise that has obstructed nation-building in the country. Furthermore, in our day-to-day social interactions, this consciousness often manifests itself during the mundane interactions.

The very effort to find the caste of a person through the surname makes one recall the old Shakespearan dilemma — What’s not in a name?

Vicious circle of caste consciousness

Caste has thus drawn an invisible and impenetrable curtain on the foremost of our national goals, which has a trickling effect on all other aspects of our collective existence. Caste has time and again stood in the way of citizens’ welfare, sometimes in more ways than one.?

In December 2021, according to a report in The Hindu, Dalit students in a school in Uttarakhand boycotted the midday meal prepared by an upper caste cook days after upper caste students refused to eat meals cooked by a Dalit woman, who was subsequently fired.

In what has been construed as an event of “reverse casteism”, what lies at the heart of this controversy is in fact a subversion of the caste system through an act of resistance and solidarity exhibited by the Dalit students. While caste consciousness certainly does not operate in a linear fashion, its lived experiences are starkly opposed for the upper versus lower rungs in its hierarchy.?

This act displays an assertion of dignity by the Dalits in the face of upper caste bullying and is an extremity to which Ambedkar’s words heeded to long ago, that you may “turn in any direction you like, caste is the monster that crosses your path”.

Caste: A hindrance to economic possibilities?

The midday meal controversy over the appointment of a bhojan mata from the Dalit community ignites a debate over the role of the chaturvarna system —the system of four varnas— in thrusting a stringent division of labourers upon caste groups. In this regard, Ambedkar described the caste system as a “a hierarchy in which the division of labourers are graded one above the other” based not on one’s choice, not even on efficiency, nor on merit or natural aptitudes, but solely on birth.

Such demarcations are incongruent with the changing realities of our time, wherein the transformations in industry require flexibility in occupational roles, which the caste system is fundamentally opposed to. Against this backdrop, economic advancement of society limps behind a division of labour based on a “dogma of predisposition”.

The detrimental effects of forcing labourers into watertight compartments based on the chaturvarna philosophy have been corroborated in a field report from rural Odisha by Columbia University researcher Suanna Oh, who studied how caste identities have continued to be a barrier to economic prosperities for the downtrodden. Oh’s findings, published in Mint, revealed that nearly half of the surveyed workers in the villages chose to stay away from caste-inconsistent tasks despite being offered 10 times their daily wage, only to avoid intermingling with workers from other castes. ?

Moreover, these rules have had the effect of farcically forcing the Shudras’ dependence on the three higher varnas—Brahmins, Kshatriyas, and Vaisyas— for their most fundamental needs, including education, defence, and economic self-sufficiency, or in the current case, food. This, Ambedkar described, ever so tellingly, as a scenario where the Shudra “was not allowed to acquire wealth, lest he should be independent of the three [higher] varnas. He was prohibited from acquiring knowledge, lest he should keep a steady vigil regarding his interests. He was prohibited from bearing arms, lest he should have the means to rebel against their authority”.?

In doing so, far from cultivating relations based on inter-dependence or mutual respect, this unjust division of labourers functioned to completely disable the so-called lower classes of Hindus for direct action against a wretched caste system.?

Caste non-conformists: A tale of political backlash

When a community has been pushed to the margins both socially and economically, it is no surprise that an attempt at political empowerment has time and again witnessed a calculated backlash from the Hindutva forces in the country. The controversy over former Delhi minister Rajendra Pal Gautam attending a conversion event in the city caught?the Aam Aadmi Party—a party that for long made its mark through its developmental agenda—amidst an ideological rift.

One cannot discount the reflection of an Ambedkarite legacy in Gautam’s move to embrace Buddhism after chanting the 22 vows that Ambedkar took on October 14, 1956. His decision to reject Hinduism for the many discriminations ingrained in the casteist Hindu society had many political ramifications not just for himself, but for his party too. The extreme Right jumped at the first avenue to vociferously label them as “anti-Hindu,” with the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) quickly tagging Gautam as an “anti-Dalit jihad supporter”, according to Firstpost.

This political ruckus over an individual’s choice to embrace a religion of his choice is not only a disservice to his fundamental right guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution of India, but is also a part of the dispensation’s patterned offensives that dismiss any non-conformity to caste, Hinduism, or the status quo, as seditious and anti-national.?

Caste as a ‘state of mind’ conundrum: Ambedkar vs Gandhi

An Ambedkarite prescription to address this sickness calibrates itself on a notional change that begins by questioning the religious basis of the caste system in Hinduism. He alleged that the reality of caste as a “state of mind” has been imbibed by sections of Hindus because they laid their guard down to the sanctity and infallibility of the shastras. To this end, Ambedkar’s cure for this centuries long malaise rests in annihilating the “sacredness and divinity with which caste has become invested”.

The problem with a complex illness of this sort, however, is that it manifests for different individuals differently. Preventive and curative treatments are often circumstantial and need to be tailor-made to suit the unique symptoms. This prompted Mahatma Gandhi to hit back at Ambedkar’s prognosis, wherein Gandhi opined that the chaturvarna ashrama in fact had nothing to do with caste and was solely a means to earn one’s bread by heeding to one’s ancestral callings.

The duo’s ideological oppositions bear enough examples in modern Indian history. One specific instance where the tussle was most pronounced was over the British offer of a communal award that granted separate electorates to the depressed classes. Ambedkar’s potential acceptance of this proposal triggered Gandhi to launch a fast unto death, which eventually culminated in the signing of the Poona Pact of 1932 between the two leaders, a compromise that gave reservations to the Harijans instead of separate electorates.

This particular incident in history forced analysts to ponder upon how much was the Mahatma trusted by the depressed classes, with Ambedkar claiming that his efforts to eradicate untouchability fell short for he failed to address the cognitive bedrocks of caste. While the Saint Gandhi understood this disease to be a socio-political one, the specialist Doctor stressed that it stems from a way of life and a state of mind.

An Ambedkarite prescription

Nevertheless, both have advocated for an effective treatment and cure to ensure meaningful reform, an end that we as a society must continue working towards. Ambedkar’s ideas, for instance, rest on the powerful weapons of reason and morality to counter the type-C malaise.

Ambedkar’s relentless efforts culminated in addressing caste as a problem for all of humanity, by including right to equality (Article 14), prohibition of caste-based discrimination (Article 15), and an abolition of the inhumane practice of untouchability (Article 17) as part of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India.

It is this legacy rooted in principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity that Ambedkar fought for. His principles marched past finding an emergency cure for the infirmity. He instead advocated for regular check-ups and good well-being. ?