In this wider context, therefore, this attempt, “India Economic & Social Justice Report 2025”, authored by none less than Professor K S Chalam, former Vice Chancellor, Dravida University, Andhra Pradesh and former Member, Union Public Service Commission, Chairman, Institute for Economic and Social Justice, Vishakhapatnam, is both significant and path-breaking. This report analyses the historical, constitutional, and socio-economic landscape of justice in India, with a specific focus on marginalised communities. This report is first of its kind to measure and indicate where both the Union and State governments stand in providing constitutional guarantees of Justice –both economic and social— equally and to all citizens of the country. Inspired by Human Development Index (HDI) of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), this report has examined several indictors to determine the Economic and Social Justice Index.

Finally, it has fixed following three dimensions.

1: MPCE (monthly per capita expenditure) per family, among Scheduled Castes to signify economic Justice. (The MPCE for ST is not produced because, states the author, it reflects the same trend).

2: Atrocities committed on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe population published by NCRBI

3. Human rights violations as recorded by NHRC are considered for estimating the Index.

The report has followed a statistical method on the lines of UNDP’s HDI. The report presents data for two periods 2011 and 2023. It is surprising to find states that are economically proactive are socially regressive in protecting the SC and ST populations; as a result, the overall ranks of ESJI are getting depressed over a period of time for such states. The report provides data and information on castes, sub castes of SC, ST and OBC population by states with caste wise data on education, economic status, reservations etc given in the Appendix. This analytical appraisal under pioneering concepts reviewing 75 years of the implementation of the Constitution is both profoundly innovative and also, bold.

The text begins with highlighting the concept of “Justice” in the Indian Constitution noting that it was heavily influenced by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, who served as the Chairman of the Drafting Committee.  The report cited how Ambedkar argued in the Constituent Assembly that social and economic justice could only be achieved through a socialistic economy, including the nationalisation of land and industry. The Preamble places “Justice—social, economic, and political” as its first element, signalling its role as the ultimate goal of the Republic.  The report emphasises that democracy in India is a “top dressing” on an undemocratic soil, requiring the cultivation of constitutional morality to overcome historical cultures of inequality as its back drop.

The report contrasts Western theories of justice with the Indian social reality of the caste system.  It discusses John Rawls’s “Justice as Fairness” and Amartya Sen’s critique, which utilises the Indian concepts of niti (organizational propriety) and nyaya (realized justice). The text argues that Western libertarian and liberal theories often fail to account for the “caste mode of production” and the “Composite Index of Discrimination” (CID) inherent in Indian society. To assess the achievements and limitations of the Constitution during the last 75 years of its operation, the report identified the instruments and institutions of justice with which they can be interrogated the transactions both in the legislature and in the judiciary. Given the limitations of the scope of the study, it broadly discusses the instruments of justice as legal documents, including Acts, Rights, Rules, Property, Budget provisions, Atrocity rates, Gini Co-efficients etc.

The institutions of Justice in India can be identified as the judiciary, civil society, market, and state represented by the proceedings of Parliament/Assembly and not necessarily the private institutional structures, as the report is concerned here with public documents: the Constitution and Government Reports .The process of delivering or dispensing social justice through the passing of various Acts, such as the SC ST (prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, including the Protection of Civil Rights Act (prevention of Untouchability) 1955, 1976, and the judicial interpretations or interventions over a period of 70 years, is termed ‘a saga of social justice drama in India’. The report opines that the appointment of the SC, ST, Minorities and Backward Classes commissions indicate the government’s intentions and obligations as per the mandate of the Constitution. However, the imagined constitutional objectives of social justice seem to have not been realized due to litigation. The issue of social justice as part of the routine prevention of untouchability cases is not limited to the broad understanding of the term Dalit at the all-India level and goes beyond. The report brings out a significant fact that some of the untouchables of North India like in UP, Bihar etc are listed as Scheduled castes there and are recorded as Backward Classes (BCs) in South India. It is difficult; the report agrees to understand the social categories without looking at the evolution of each caste group in the social history of India. The report however, has not gone deep in to that dimension here.

The first part of the report examined various aspects of each dimension, namely the Economic and Social measures of justice. After identifying the dimensions, the data was normalised. In the second stage, the indicators for economic justice, consisting of monthly per capita expenditure are considered. The maximum and minimum values of each dimension were obtained from the internal dimensions of the factors considered. For example, the four categories of social groups SC, ST, OBC, and others for which data are made available have been tested as to which group was the most deprived in terms of their mean values, and the group with the least value was used for the calculation of the indicator (the data are given in the appendix Tables not in the text). As noted above, the economic dimension of MPCE adequately explains literacy; therefore, it is dropped at the stage of calculating the index. Finally, the ESJI is arrived at by combining the three dimensions and dividing it by 1 by 3 to arrive at the average and subtracting the value from 1 to arrive at the comprehensive index. The ESJI value indicates deprivation, with zero indicating absolute justice and one indicating Absolute Injustice or Deprivation.

The significant finding of the report is estimation of Wealth Stolen from Native Indians including ‘Untouchables and lower (depressed) castes’ who suffered the loss of lands cleared and cultivated by them. These were ultimately stolen by the traivarnikas[1] with the support of the state, argues the report Native Indians have remained landless and poor. Yet, they were the ones who were involved in the production process and created wealth. The report obtained data from the Madison study on the World GDP and GDP for India from the year 0 to 1973 as published by OECD. The data was used to arrive at the contribution of ‘lower (depressed) castes’ to India GDP and its proportion in the World economy. It is surprising to find that one fourth of the Wealth of the World was created by these ‘depressed’ castes of India amounting to around $ 25 billion in the year 0 and this figure could have reached $ 25 trillion cumulatively by the end of 1000 AD known as the age of conflicts and regional satraps. The Report notes (observes) that a vast portion of India’s historical wealth was created by depressed (lower) castes but appropriated by “non-productive groups”. The report has cited the Oxfam Report on India 2025 to show that the amount of colonial plunder of the British India is almost equal to the amount estimated to have been stolen by the upper castes from Dalits and Bahujans. This is a very important statistic that might, in future, lead to probing debates across activist groups.

A significant portion of the text is dedicated to the unequal distribution of assets and wealth.  Historically, Dalits (Scheduled Castes) were forbidden from owning land, gold, or weapons. As of 2015-16, the average land holdings of Scheduled Castes have dropped to 0.78 hectares, and roughly 58% of them remain landless at all India. The author of the report introduces the concept of “Caste-Based Cronyism,” arguing that modern economic liberalisation has primarily benefited the “Dvija” (upper-caste) groups through Multi-Caste Corporations (MCC), effectively recreating Varnashrama Dharma in the 21st century.

Social Injustice is measured in terms of the atrocities data for SC and ST obtained from the NCRB reports. It is noted that despite Article 17 of the Constitution, the report notes a sharp rise in atrocities. NCRB data shows atrocities on Dalits increased from 17,667 in 1990 to 53,886 in 2020, more than threefold raise.  In the context of women empowerment as part of Social Justice the text of the report recognizes the “Founding Mothers” of the Constitution (e.g., Sarojini Naidu, Amrit Kaur) who fought for women’s rights and the Hindu Code Bill against “blatant sexism” in the Assembly. The judiciary is critiqued for its “non-representative character,” with allegations that it remains influenced by a small number of elite families (as reported by Prof Mark Gallanter etc.), often leading to the acquittal of those accused of atrocities against Dalits implying that it did not result in reducing the intensity of injustice. Apart from the NCRB data, the report makes use of the NHRC data on human rights violations recorded by caste and state to arrive at the Economic and Social Justice Index.

The report proposes a new quantitative tool, the ESJI, inspired by the UNDP’s Human Development Index. This is calculated using the three dimensions: MPCE: Monthly Per Capita Expenditure of SC households, SC and ST Atrocities: Rates recorded by the NCRB per lakh of population and Human Rights Violations: Cases recorded by the NHRC.  The index aims to provide a measurable “deprivation index” where a value of zero indicates absolute justice and one indicates absolute injustice.  The report concludes that while the Constitution provides a mandate for justice, institutional structures—particularly the judiciary and the market have failed to gift justice to the victims and the same have largely helped to reinforce traditional caste-based inequalities rather than dismantling them.

The report notes that Justice is not quantifiable, but its impact can be envisaged in terms of the dimensions through which it affects the human condition. There are several measures developed and used to state the economic circumstances of the people like the PQLI (Physical Quality of Life) Index constructed by ODA in the 1970s. There are other indices that are now being used to quantify and analyse human quality of life, economic and social development indicators along with the aggregate concept of GDP, HDI etc. Against this background, the objective of this report as claimed by the author is to determine where Economic and Social Justice, as defined in the text, stands at different periods of time in India. The values are arranged such that the highest value indicates more deprivation and the lowest value nearing zero indicates perfect justice. The ESJI was 0.212 in 2011 and climbed to 0.305 in 2023. This means that economic and social justice deprivation has almost doubled over 12 years in India.

Economic and social justice are interdependent, complimentary and it is only a comprehensive approach that will tremendously help India grow. Such ‘growth’ is simply not possible unless the fruits of development reach the most marginalised sections. The report examines state wise indicators in terms of the above-mentioned dimensions and found the major former BIMARU states, Bihar, U.P, Rajasthan that are being touted now as improving in terms of economic indicators like per capita income or expenditure, are however consistent in getting higher ranks of deprivations except U.P that records minor change.

In 2011, the ESJI of Bihar was 0.141, M.P 0.184, Rajasthan 0.225 and U.P 0.510. The ESJI for 2023 for Bihar is 0.281, M.P 0.412, U.P 0.443 and Rajasthan 0.433. Uttar Pradesh (UP) that had an index of 0.443 in 2011 has the highest rank among the states now and has lowered its value to 0.470. Rajasthan with 0.480 has replaced U.P in the dubious position of highest rank in 2023.  These five states are listing as the better performing West Bengal 0.040, Assam 0.041, Chhattisgarh 0.074, Tamil Nadu 0.099, Punjab 0.101 and Maharashtra 0.107 in 2011. The same states remained as better though their ranks have altered. In 2023 Assam with 0.077, West Bengal 0.110, Chhattisgarh 0.112, Jharkhand 0.167 and Punjab 0.162 are found to be in a better position with lower ranks. Interestingly Jharkhand a predominantly tribal state joined the ranks of better performed states in 2023 and Maharashtra slid down one mark in its rank.

Among the South Indian states, the ranks of Andhra Pradesh in 2011 was 13 with 0.196, Kerala with 0.317 in 16^th rank were among the lowest five ranks. It is noted that in 2023 Telangana joined the ranks of lowest performing states with 0.380 at the 20th rank and Andhra Pradesh has improved its rank with a value of 0.285. The ranks and values of ESJI are given for all the states and Union Territories are given in the Appendix to the Report.

The author is very pragmatic in accepting the limitations of the study: restrictions in data and the inadequacies of reports of the government for an all-India study of this nature.   However, the estimated indices to quantify and explain how India is performing in terms of the Constitutional objectives of Economic and Social Justice is a first rigorous endeavour and commendable. With all these limitations, this is an excellent report with useful parameters and matrix on economic, social and other related issues. These tables and data are presented in the Appendix of Tables for reference to assist scholars and activists and lead them towards compiling more such indices.

The report is not a simple exercise of research and reflection. The exercise reveals the author’s commitment to the most marginalized peoples, Constitutional categories of persons that were promised justice, economic and social about 75 years ago and who have suffered betrayal for decades since. This section is also the major segment of our population.

The study is not just presentation of figures and statistical tables to substantiate the arguments, but the sheer writing —sentences with emotions carried through the paragraphs reflect the agony and despair the author experienced both as a scholar and perhaps as a silent worker. Frankly speaking, much has been talked about Human Development Reports but they fail to take into account Caste discrimination and other systematic deprivations that are both social as well as political.

Prof K.S.Chalam should be applauded for the effort of producing such a report despite acute hardships of access, especially because most of data relied upon is institutional data. It is also important that the publication of such/similar reports becomes an annual feature to assist and guide policy makers who frame policies for the widest sections of Indians.

We hope that NITI Ayog and other important institution both at the Centre as well as in the states will benefit from these reports and encourage each state to engage with such an approach to publish HDIs on social, economic and political justice. The Institute for Economic and Social justice along with Prof Chalam’s vast experience in socio-economic and political economy studies should continue this exercise and bring in greater nuances into the public debate. The report is an important step in that direction.

Pre-launch orders (before May 31, 2026 are discounted and the price for the single copy is at Rs 400 including postage charges during this period) Contact for copies: Email: Chalamks@hotmail.com

[1] Traivarnikas (or Traivarṇika) is a Sanskrit term referring to the members of the three upper classes (varnas) in traditional Hindu society: the Brahmins (priests/scholars), Kshatriyas (warriors/rulers), and Vaishyas (merchants/traders); the term translates directly to “those of the three colors” or “three classes.” It serves to group these three communities together and distinguish them from the Shudras (laborers) and Avarnas (those considered outside the traditional four-fold Varna system).

Related:

Protecting India’s future: Why Ladakh, Himachal and Uttarakhand deserve special status

River Ganga, communities, cultures & livelihood: will Indians preserve its life-sustaining legacy?

Dr BR Ambedkar: How the ongoing tussle between the BJP and Congress is both limited & superficial

The post India Economic & Social Justice Report 2025: First-ever study measures constitutional justice across union and state governments, have they delivered? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

As is well known, Kushinagar is one of the most important holy places for Buddhists worldwide, as the Buddha delivered his last sermon here and attained Mahaparinirvana here. Bhadant Gyaneshwar was the most senior Buddhist monk in Kushinagar and had served as President of the Kushinagar Monks’ Association since 2005. He assumed this role after the passing of Bhadant Aniruddha Mahathera of Lumbini. The Kushinagar Monks’ Association was established on December 18, 1952, with Bhadant Chandramani Mahathera as its first President, serving until May 8, 1972. Bhadant Uttikhendariya Mahathera and Achyutananda Mahathera subsequently became Presidents. Bhadant Gyaneshwar Mahathera was thus the sixth President of the Kushinagar Bhikshu Association.

Bhadant Gyaneshwar was born on November 10, 1936, in the village of Jibenji, in the Akyab district of Arakan province, Burma. Arakan is now part of Rakhine State. His childhood name was Aung Ja Wae, and his father was a farmer. Today, Burma is known as Myanmar. Rakhine State remains the most indigenous and largest Buddhist region, though in recent years the treatment of Rohingya Muslims and their plight have drawn considerable international attention.

Bhadant Gyaneshwar had publicly noted that this issue was not so polarised during his time. He recalled that Bengali Muslims had migrated to his region and exploited local people. He vividly remembered events from World War II. In conversations with me, he discussed Myanmar’s diverse ethnicities but emphasised that there was no caste system or untouchability, unlike what he encountered extensively in India. His village, a coastal area with a significant Buddhist population, shaped his early life. Bhadant Gyaneshwar’s mother died during his childhood, causing him great suffering. At a young age, he was drawn to the teachings of Dhamma. On April 12, 1949, he entered a university in Rangoon (now Yangon) to study Pali. On June 3, 1956, after six years of studying Buddhism, he became a shramana and received the name that became known in Hindi as Dnyaneshwar or Gyaneshwar.

Burma was a flourishing centre of Buddhism, and India maintained strong relations with it. In 1954, Burma hosted the Sixth Buddhist Council, attended by Bhante Dharmarakshita. Babasaheb Ambedkar and E.V.R. Periyar also participated in this historic conference in Rangoon. Though only 18 years old, Bhadant Gyaneshwar attended and met Babasaheb Ambedkar. He remembered little of the encounter, being too young to grasp Dr. Ambedkar’s socio-political significance; like other locals, he was there to listen to distinguished guests and serve. The large-scale event held special meaning for him nonetheless.

Buddhist monks from Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Myanmar have long visited India’s historical and religious sites, often saddened by their neglect and dedicating their lives to restoration. Anagarika Dharmapala of Sri Lanka played a pivotal role in reviving Buddhism in India. For context, he fought to restore Buddhist control over the Mahabodhi Temple in Bodh Gaya; his efforts helped revive Buddhism and its heritage across South Asia. He is renowned globally for advancing Buddhist ideas and practices.

Bhadant Gyaneshwar’s parents knew Bhadant Chandramani, as his father followed Buddhism. In 1962, when Bhikkhu Dharmarakshita and Bhikkhu Kittima Mahasthavir learned about Bhadant Chandramani’s declining health—one of India’s most respected monks—their concern deepened. They recognised his efforts to preserve Buddhist Dhamma in Kushinagar and sought someone to care for him while ensuring deep Dhamma knowledge and devotion for the future. By 1962, Bhadant Chandramani’s health had become a worry for the Buddhist community. Accordingly, the two bhikkhus invited 27-year-old Gyaneshwar from Burma to India, directing him to Kushinagar to live with Bhadant Chandramani. Bhadant Gyaneshwar arrived on August 5, 1963, to serve his guru and strengthen Buddhist heritage. From then on, he immersed himself in Indian Buddhist traditions, mastering the local language. He worked for the upliftment of marginalised people and counselled Dhamma practitioners from India and abroad, contributing significantly to Kushinagar’s development.

Bhadant Gyaneshwar possessed a sharp memory and an extraordinary ability to share his vast experiences. He regularly met disciples and people from all walks of life, discussing socio-religious issues. Language was initially a barrier, but he soon became fluent in Hindi and Bhojpuri, travelling worldwide. He continued charitable and social activities initiated by Bhadant Chandramani Mahasthavir. Though unable to return to Myanmar, he maintained ties; the Bhadant Chandramani VIP Guest House in Kushinagar was built with Myanmar Buddhists’ support.

His life exemplified struggle. In conversations with me, he shared key experiences, including efforts to remove unauthorised occupation from land around the Mahaparinirvana site in Kushinagar. These battles—reconstructing sites and reclaiming land—form a long and inspiring story. To adapt to India, he enrolled in local schools, completing high school in 1968, intermediate in 1970, BA in 1973, and MA in 1975 from Buddha Degree College, Kushinagar. He later earned Pali Sahitya Ratna and an LLB degree, reflecting his passion for knowledge.

The Myanmar government honoured him with its highest religious award. Due to COVID-19 restrictions, he could not travel, so the Myanmar Ambassador conferred the title *Abhidhaja Maharatthaguru* in Kushinagar in June 2021. Earlier honours included *Abhidhaja Aggamaha Thaddamma Jotika* (2016), *Aggamaha Pandita* (1993), and *Aggamaha Thaddamma Jotika Daza* (2005) for his service to Buddhism. Bhadant Gyaneshwar became a legal Indian citizen in 1978 and remained President of the Kushinagar Main Temple Bhikshu Sangha until his death.

He was associated with numerous Buddhist religious and charitable organisations and served on the Bodhgaya Mahavihara Administrative Body (appointed by the Bihar government) from 1990 to 2018. 

When I had asked him if Bodh Gaya should remain a Buddhist pilgrimage site, he replied, “Shouldn’t it be handed over to Buddhists as it is the most sacred site for Buddhists.” He advocated transferring all Buddhist sites to Buddhist control. While accepting Archaeological Survey of India oversight for preservation, he noted that global visitors seek not just archaeology but Buddhist teachings. India, as the Buddha’s land, should facilitate this.

Many disciples have become prominent monks strengthening India’s Buddhist movement. Dr. Nanda Ratan Bhante Thero, head of the Sri Lanka Buddha Vihara, met him in 1995 while in Shravasti. He pursued higher education under “Guruji” (as disciples called Bhadant Gyaneshwar). In 1998, Guruji sent him to Myanmar’s International Theravada Buddhist University; he returned to Kushinagar in 1999.

Dr. Nanda Ratan Bhante says Guruji cared deeply for the poorest and most marginalised, prioritising education—especially for girls—and fought caste discrimination and untouchability. Thousands of followers in India and abroad attended his lectures and invitations. At Guruji’s request, Japan’s Maitri Association supported education for hundreds of children within a 10-kilometre radius of Kushinagar. He remained active in Kushinagar’s development.

Bhante Nand Ratan ji cared for Guruji devotedly. Days ago, at a Buddhist prayer meeting at our Prerna Kendra, he asked everyone to wish Guruji health and long life. Today, meeting him where Bhadant Gyaneshwar’s body lay for devotees’ darshan, Guruji was pensive: “We tried our best but could not save him. We wanted him for many more years. This will be my greatest regret.” I have seen Bhante Nand Ratan ji always caring for Bhadant Gyaneshwar. He did everything possible, but some things are beyond human control. Bhadant Gyaneshwar’s presence will be missed, yet his network of followers will carry his legacy forward.

Bhadant Gyaneshwar dedicated his life to Dhamma and gave Kushinagar a renewed identity. Children study in his schools; his temple attracts domestic and foreign visitors. Experiencing caste in India, he told me he had never known it in Myanmar, where ethnic differences existed without hierarchy.

Interviewing him nearly five years ago was a privilege and honour. As the Guru of Gurus, I was hesitant, unsure how to proceed. He called for a chair so I could sit beside him and converse comfortably. He answered with profound depth. Today, paying respects at the same venue, memories of that interview flooded back. At its end, he recited a Buddhist hymn for our well-being.

Throughout his long public life, he followed the Buddha’s path—the hope Babasaheb Ambedkar saw for the Bahujan Samaj, our true freedom for over 85% of the population. Bhadant Gyaneshwar’s efforts to spread Buddha’s wisdom in India and beyond will inspire generations. He loved Kushinagar, building its Buddhist identity. The Burmese Buddha Vihara and its later stupa were major contributions. Frankly, the stupa at the Burmese Buddha Vihara has become Kushinagar’s landmark.

A fitting tribute to Bhadant Gyaneshwar.

**Bhavatu Sabba Mangalam!**

Related:

Periyar: Caste, Nation and Socialism

Periyar: Caste, Nation and Socialism

The ‘Harijans’ of Bangladesh: Victims of constitutional neglect and social isolation

The post Obituary: Bhadant Gyaneshwar and his invaluable contribution to the buddhist world appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The exploitation of the northern Himalayan states has been particularly severe. Ladakh’s unique culture and identity were long subsumed under the larger Jammu and Kashmir issue, leaving little recognition that Ladakhis live with a distinct lifestyle and worldview. Himachal Pradesh, carved out of Punjab, continues to face domination by Chandigarh’s political and business elite. In Uttarakhand, decades of neglect under Uttar Pradesh rule left the region starved of infrastructure and basic services. While leaders like Govind Ballabh Pant, H. N. Bahuguna, and N. D. Tiwari rose to prominence, they did little to secure a special status for the hills. Unlike Madhya Pradesh, which designated tribal areas under the Fifth Schedule, Uttar Pradesh deliberately avoided such recognition.

For years, these regions languished without schools, hospitals, or basic amenities. But with the economic liberalisation of the 1990s, the very areas once dismissed as “backward” suddenly became lucrative for corporate interests. As powerful lobbies began eyeing their resources, governments shed all hesitation. Today, with the corporate-political nexus firmly in place and a pliant media amplifying their agenda, dissent is swiftly branded “anti-national.” Those who challenge cronyism or demand jobs and ecological safeguards are vilified, while those enriching corporate monopolies are hailed as patriots.

The case of Sonam Wangchuk illustrates this distortion. One may debate his methods, but his commitment to Ladakh and to protecting the fragile Himalayan ecosystem is beyond dispute. Wangchuk is respected in the region, yet the national media—what I call lala media—seeks to discredit him by framing his advocacy as subversive. Instead of listening to Ladakhis, they interview a handful of voices in Delhi’s elite neighbourhoods and construct narratives that delegitimize local struggles. This is not journalism but propaganda.

Yes, Wangchuk may run an organisation and be accountable under the law for its funding, but he is first and foremost a citizen of India. Every citizen has the right—and the duty—to defend their language, culture, environment, and homeland. To label such voices “anti-national” is not only unjust but also absurd, especially when the real threat in Ladakh comes not from Pakistan, as authorities hastily allege, but from China across our borders.

The time has come for the government to take the Himalayan question seriously. Ladakh, Himachal, and Uttarakhand are not just picturesque landscapes; they are border states whose ecological stability and native communities are vital to India’s security. The army draws immense strength from the support of these very people. To undermine their rights in the name of reckless “development” is to weaken the very foundations of national security.

Protecting the Himalayas means protecting India’s future. The government must stop mindless excavation of mountains, end the handover of resources to cronies, and instead engage meaningfully with local communities. The demand is simple and just: safeguard the ecology, protect the rights of the natives, and recognise these regions as special zones critical to the survival of both democracy and the nation.

*Human rights defender

Courtesy: CounterView

The post Protecting India’s future: Why Ladakh, Himachal and Uttarakhand deserve special status appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Periyar’s interaction in the north India with began with his visit to Kashi in 1904 where he suffered humiliation due to caste discrimination by the local priests. But as a political activist Periyar’s formal interaction started with his visit to Kanpur in 1944 5o participate in All India Backward Non-Brahmin Hindus conference from December 29 till December 31^st, 1944. Periyar was well aware of things happening in the north particularly the movement being led by Baba Saheb Ambedkar. It is not known to many people that Periyar had translate Baba Saheb’s extraordinary work of Annihilation of Caste in Tamil. Mr S V Rajadurai in his wonderful conversation with me brought these amazing facts about Periyar’s north Indian relations in the recently published book ‘Periyar: Caste, Nation and Socialism’. Periyar was also the vice President of ‘Jat Pat Todal Mandal’ but refused to change his stand as what were the reasons of caste discrimination which he felt emanates from the Varna system. I had raised the issues of Periyar’s north Indian engagement with Mr Rajadurai and he really worked hard to bring these facts of life to all the people.

Periyar visited Kanpur on February 8^th, 1959 on the invitation of Republican Party of India and some of his admirers like Chhedi Lal Saathi and others. Periyar addressed a huge gathering of RPI activists at Ganga Prasad Memorial Hall Lucknow where Dr Chhedi Lal Saathi translated his speech. Socialist leader Raj Narain too hosted a tea party his honour. Periyar continued to speak at different platforms in Lucknow, Kanpur, Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta and Pune. He tried to strengthen Republican Party of India after the demise of Baba Saheb Ambedkar by addressing their different gatherings. Those who speak against Periyar should know this fact of his Periyar was highly influenced by Baba Saheb’s philosophy but he admired him and promoted his work after his demise.

It is not that Periyar spoke with the political gatherings. He also spoke at Lucknow University who were protesting against him in the beginning but later understood his stand on social justice, OBC and Dalit reservation and cheered for him. Dr K Veeramani translated his speech at the Lucknow University campus on February 11^th, 1959. Periyar also addressed students at the Siddhartha College, established by Baba Saheb Ambedkar in Mumbai on February 25^th, 1959. He visited Lucknow again in 1968.

One of the most outstanding admirers of Periyar and who promoted his work in the north India was Lalai Singh Yadav, a humanist rationalist and part of well-known social movement called ‘Arjak Sangha’. Arjak Sangh was promoting the enlightenment, rationalist thinking and warning the Bahujan communities against rituals and blind beliefs. For all such thoughtful people, Periyar along with Baba Saheb Ambedkar remained their heroes. Lalai Singh Yadav translated Periyar’s work on Ramayana under title ‘Sachchi Ramayana’ i.e., True Ramayana. The Uttar Pradesh government banned the book and confiscated its copies on December 9, 1969. Arjak Sangh and Lalai Singh Yadav condemned the incident and challenged the government order under the pretext of ‘law and order trouble due to hurt sentiments of the people’, at the Allahabad High Court which declared the ban on book as invalid. Uttar Pradesh government went in the Supreme Court against this order challenging the lifting of ban by the Allahabad High Court. On September 16^th, 1976, Supreme Court delivered a historic verdict which upheld the high court order and dismissed government’s review petition. Justice Krishna Iyer, Justice P N Bhagwati and justice Syed Murtaza gave a verdict. Delivering the verdict Justice Iyer said, ‘A government can always learn from the criticism of its opponents than from the eulogy of its supporters. To stifle that criticism is, at least, ultimately, to prepare its own destruction.’

The verdict of the Supreme Court was the best tribute to the icon of reason and humanism, Periyar on the eve of his 97th birthday. This was the period RPI in Uttar Pradesh and elsewhere was virtually moving towards political extinction and got divided into various fractions but Arjak Sangh was the only non-political movement for humanist values and social change. It carried the legacy of spreading Periyar’s work in common parlance in Uttar Pradesh. As Arjak Sangh was anti superstitious, Periyar’s rationalism and other such actions influenced them. The image creation of Periyar revolving around Arjak Sangha was mostly as an idol breaker. His issues of social justice, women’s liberation, self-respect marriages, proportional representation are frankly still not in wider circulations among political as well as cultural activists. Though Arjak Sangh was still working but its sharpness continued to decline after the demise of leaders like Ramswaroop Verma and Lalai Singh Yadav.

In 1990 when V P Singh was the prime minister and accepted implementation of 27% reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in the Central government job, a new movement was building up in north India. Ambedkar Phule Periyar became immensely popular with the Dalit Bahujan activists and intellectuals. Ambedkarites were writing about Periyar and his work. Parallel to them was the rise of Bahujan Samaj Party, which filled the vacuum created by the marginalisation of Republican Party of India. The ‘demise’ of RPI in Uttar Pradesh gave rise to the growth of BSP in the 1980s and in 1993 the party made a historical alliance with Samajwadi Party and came to power in Uttar Pradesh. Slogans like ‘Mile Mulayam Kanshiram: Hawa ho Gaye Jaishriram’ simply translate as when The Slogan Jaishriram would be worthless once Mulayam and Kanshiram join hand. BSP was that time aggressively speaking about Ambedkar and Periyar in north India. The alliance of SP-BSP collapsed due to contradictions and political ambitions of leaders. BSP formed government with the support of BJP in Uttar Pradesh. It was a big shock but people accepted it as long as they felt their ‘interests’ were not being compromised. The first thing BSP announced after assuming power was installing big iconic statutes of Dalit Bahujan Icons and celebration of ‘Periyar Mela’ in the heart of Lucknow city. The declaration of a Periyar Mela to be organised in Lucknow city angered the alliance partner BJP and they protested terming Periyar as anti-North and anti-Ram, they threatened to pull out of the government. Since then, BSP does not use Periyar’s photograph in its political work. In the initial phases, it was BSP workers who used to speak a lot of Periyar but afterwards slowly political realities of the state forced them to abandon Periyar completely. Now, BSP does not want to any way affiliate with the memory of Periyar. The crisis of the other parties in north India particularly Samajwadi Party, Janta Dal or RJD is much more serious as most of them can’t afford to lose their community votes they avoid Periyar. These parties actually were formed by those inspired by socialist leader Ram Manohar Lohia and Jai Prakash Narain. Politically, it was just RPI or BSP which promoted Periyar in the north India. Socially, Arjak Sangh’ which was actually led by the leaders from backward communities but Periyar’s political message in the north India was carried out by RPI and BSP (in the beginning) and BAMSCEF and mostly all of them led by Ambedkarites. So, one thing is clear, Periyar in north India has not been read or promoted by the backward communities because of the abject failure and opportunism of the political parties claiming to represent the politics of ‘social justice’ particularly those intellectuals who used him just to make their juicy references on religion rather than looking his monumental work of Self Respect Movement that brought the backward communities and Dalits to the power structure in the Dravida land. Ambedkar, Phule and Periyar were revolutionary icons who challenged the Brahmanical hegemony which most of the political parties are not ready to challenge yet social movements, rationalist, humanist activists, Bahujan social cultural leaders continue to be inspired by Periyar and his monumental work to liberate Dravidian masses in Tamilnadu and empower them socially, culturally and politically.

The vast treasure of work brought out by Mr S. V. Rajadurai on Periyar is a must read for all. Now, the book titled ‘Periyar: Caste, Nation and Socialism: S V Rajadurai in Conversation with Vidya Bhushan Rawat’, published by People’s Literature Publication, Mumbai, is now available on Amazon and Flipkart. Those who are interested in Periyar’s north Indian engagement along as well as many other critical issues of Periyar’s understanding on Dalits, untouchability, Land questions as well as communism, would get extremely rare and important information about the same.

Periyar ignite the heart and minds of all the humanists. Let his spirit of enlightenment and rational humanist thought grow everywhere.

Related:

Periyar: Caste, Nation and Socialism

Why is Periyar not taught in Indian schools and colleges?

Opinion: Bahujans need to spread Phule and Periyar’s message in person, not just on social media

The post Periyar the icon of social justice and humanism appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Vidya Bhushan Rawat has been engaged in numerous conversations with activists, writers, all over the world. He started it with veteran Ambedkarites who had seen Baba Saheb and many of them had worked with him. That apart, Vidya Bhushan Rawat has been conversing with people across the globe and it is an amazing fiat that include Ambedkarite activists abroad, African American intellectuals, intellectuals and activists from African countries such as South Africa, Kenya, Senegal, Mauritania, Palestine, Bangladesh, Nepal, Philippines etc. Even various nationals of Indian origins who belonged to families of indentured laborers have been interviewed by him.

His two volumes of these conversations have already been out which include interviews with over 45 individuals from different countries. One volume of such conversations also published in Hindi recently under the title ‘Ambedkarwaad : Vichardhara aur Sangharsh” containing 13 interviews with those legendary Ambedkarites who had either worked with Dr Ambedkar or followed him closely. While there are a number of people in north India, who could speak about Dr Ambedkar with a personal ideological standpoint but not so about Periyar. That is why this conversation with S V Rajadurai is so important and different. Well, it is different because this is one conversation with one individual who is a highly respected intellectual activist from Tamilnadu and dedicated to Tamil nationalist movement’s idealism too. Secondly, the conversation also explores, for the first time, Periyar’s visit to various cities in the North. While, it was in the domain that Periyar visited Lucknow but sadly nothing much was known about these visits. This conversation has done an immense amount of work on Periyar’s conversation with people in the Hindi heartland. The result of the entire exploration from the archives particularly the journals and magazines being run by Perriyar and DK. This was often ignored about Periyar’s north Indian visits by those who have written his biographies as well as political actions.

This book has all those questions who as an activist or enthusiast one might have about Periyar’s movement. Comrade S V Rajadurai has worked extremely hard on this book despite his serious health issues. It is a big tribute to his commitment to the cause of Periyarism that this book is out.

In this gossip age, we have been able to bring a very serious material through conversation. This also reflects that conversations can really bring out those things often ignored by the authors and leaders themselves.

On a personal note, I would love it if people take up translating this book in Hindi to make people understand what exactly Periyar stood for as there are numerous misconceptions about him.

Kindly support such an initiative. Read and share. Your encouragement will help us work more on such issues.

This book is now available on Amazon and Flipkart. You may also write to Mr Vivek Sakpal, People’s Literature Publication.

https://www.flipkart.com/periyar-caste-nation-socialism/p/itm8831fd07fb742

First Published on countercurrent.org

The post Periyar: Caste, Nation and Socialism appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On the Buddha Purnima Day, May 12, 2025, Bihar governor, Arif Mohammad Khan visited the holy shrine, waxed eloquent about the greatness of Buddha but remained silent on the issue of the MahaBodhi Vihar being handed over to a Buddhist only management. Buddhist activists have also accused the governor of offering archana to Lord Shiva too, ignoring the sentiments of the Buddhists. Shockingly, while speaking “highly” of Buddha at an event, the governor did not even acknowledge that Buddhists have been protesting through a sit-in –for over two months —asking for a change in the BodhGaya Temple Management Committee.

Prior to Buddha Purnima day, there was a continuous dharana at the site and Buddhists particularly from Maharashtra were thronging the site. Bahujan Vikas Aghadi leader Prakash Ambedkar too visited and expressed his strong solidarity with the movement. BSP leader Ms Mayawati too expressed her solidarity with the movement though she has not yet travelled to Bodh Gaya. Except for these two leaders, no other leader of any recognised party has spoken about it. RJD which is the main opposition party in Bihar has been conspicuously silent on the question. PDA leader Akhilesh Yadav and his party have not bothered to address Buddhist concerns. Rahul Gandhi, the eloquent Leader of the Opposition (LoP in the Lok Sabha) who has made several visits to Bihar and even raised the issue of Dalit opporession has not uttered a word about the Mahabodhi Temple issue. Incidentally, there were prompt greetings to one and all on social media on Buddha Purnima day, but around the MahaBodhi Vihar there has been only silence.

None of the legacy media, newspapers or electronic media –with the exception of some Youtubers and Ambedkarite portals —have interrogated the festering issue. Instead,  reports have come in only from activist cadres and some leaders from Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh. There is a clash of political ideologies here too and that is natural. For millions of Dalits in India, the road to Buddhism goes via Baba Saheb Ambedkar while for a number of Buddhists in the Himalayan regions like Ladakh, Darjeeling, Himachal or Uttar Pradesh, Buddhism may not have the same political connotation as for the Ambedkarites who look upon it like a liberation theology. That contradiction seems to be emerging here too. Unfortunately therefore a blame game too has begun.

Read: Why the Bodh Gaya temple must be handed over to Buddhists

There was a call for a large gathering at Gaya on Buddha Purnima Day. However, it seems, that except for some dedicated Buddhists from Maharashtra and many from Uttar Pradesh, there was not a significant gathering here. To date, one Akash Lama has been leading the ‘non-political movement’ but suddenly he announced the suspension of the Dharana on Buddha Purnima day resulting in public accusations of his conniving with RSS and the NDA government. It is at this point of time another mendicant, Bhante Vinaya Acharya who seems to have questioned this suspension of Dharna as well as the inactive movement and wanted to launch a bigger movement to liberate the holiest shrines of the Buddhists, has been missing suddenly from the night of May 12.  Unconfirmed reports suggest that he has been arrested by the police though there is no information about his whereabouts. It is also strange that Bhant’s arrest or disappearance has not found its way in the Bihar media. Not much is heard from the political class about him. So, nobody actually knows what is happening as there is not a single official line from among India’s Buddhists, either..

A video has gone viral in which a local vendor is heard responding with ‘Jai Shri Ram’ to calls of ‘Jai Bhim’. Thereafter an altercation follows over why a non-Buddhist or anti Buddhist person has been allowed to be in the location of MahaBodhi Vihar. The issue of Maha Bodhi Vihar has suffered from the absence of enough local Buddhists living in Bodh Gaya. Despite all the sloganeering by national and regional opposition parties –espousing the politics of Pichda Dalit Adivasi (PDA) or the Bahujans – a vast majority of the Bahujan masses actually suffer from their own caste hierarchies. The sole thing that  unites them is the discrimination unleashed by Brahmanical forces. However, they have been unsuccessful so far in launching a movement that could eliminate Brahmanism from among themselves. Many intellectuals claim that it is a conspiracy to speak on these internal contradictions. The irony is that while a majority of the people, communities and castes that live in and around the Mahabodhi Vihar belong to Dalit Bahujan communities, the issue of independent Buddhist management  has not yet galvanised enough local support in a manner that could politically threaten the state government.

Leaders like Chirag Paswan or Jeetan Ram Manjhi have remained absolutely silent on the question. It is clear that the issue has not yet captured the emotion and sentiments of the local Bahujan masses which itself is a failure of its reach. Bihar’s social justice politics actually revolves around a class of agrarian-involved OBCs who have not been delinked from Brahmanical traditions. The cultural affiliation of communities like Dusadh as well as Charmkars too is heavily turned towards the rituals and practices which are often linked to Brahmanism. Unlike the Mahars in Maharashtra and Jatavs and Chamars in Uttar Pradesh, Dalits as well as OBCs in Bihar are culturally inclined to Brahmanical practices and rituals.

Even at the start, the Mahabodhi Mahavihara issue was not one raised by locals. It was the Sri Lankan Bhikkhu Anagarika Dharmapala who internationalised it. The Buddhist movement in India spread afresh among the masses only after Babasaheb Ambedkar revived this with his mass conversion, however, unfortunateky after his ‘Mahaparinirvana’, the movement remained confined to Maharashtra alone and thereafter spread only partly to Western Uttar Pradesh. The movement got revitalised after the ascendancy of BSP in power in the state when Ms Mayawati became chief minister of the state. She promoted Buddhism, created separate districts like Kushinagar, Mahamayanagar and  Panchsheel Nagar etc apart implementing some key policy measures.

However, the issue of Mahabodhi Mahavihara has always haunted the Buddhist community world over — why has their holiest shrine not been handed over to them for independent management. There is no dispute over the authenticity and historicity of the Mahabodhi Mahavihara but it is disturbing to see the deafening silence of all the major political players. Prime Minister Narendra Modi on his foreign tours, speaks about Buddha and Buddhism as India’s cultural heritage but so far he has remained mute on the issue. Bihar government too has not spoken anything of it. The Ambedkarites are also pinning their hopes on the Chief Justice of India Justice B R Gavai but the fact is that the most important influencer in this regard can only be Prime Minister Narendra Modi apart from other Hindu organisations who should peacefully resolve this issue by handing over the Management of the BodhGaya Temple Management Committee to the Buddhists. While Hindu organisations have been seeking a positive response from Muslims in relation to all the religious places that they feel were originally ‘Hindu’ but were ‘demolished’ or appropriated as Mosques. The argument for Ayodhya Ram Temple movement was the same that Muslims should respect the sentiments of Hindus and hand over the temple to Hindus. The Supreme Court order in this regard was more to ‘honour’ the sentiments of Hindus rather than a judgement based on facts and constitutionality. The court used its own power in the good faith so that a political issue which should have been resolved long back, is now settled amicably. It is surprising why the same court cannot ask Hindus to respect the sentiments of Buddhists and ask the government to make due changes in the BodhGaya Temple Management Committee and hand it over to Buddhists. There is no dispute on its historicity and Buddhist background yet neither the court nor the political leaders have spoken about it.

For all political parties, any issue relates to the wider support and the linked political profit or loss in raising it. This is the only reason (motive) for a party with not much stake in Bihar –like the Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi –is vocal while those in Bihar are silent only because of the absence of a popular local movement in its supports. Neither Lalu Yadav nor Chirag Paswan have spoken . Rahul Gandhi who has been vocal on the issues of Dalits as well as EBCs, has remained mute. He recently travelled to Darbhanga, addressed the SC students at the Ambedkar Hostel and later saw the film Phule with various activists, academics, students and politicians at a mall in Patna but did not utter a single word about the Buddhists demanding justice at Bodh Gaya.

This clearly indicates that for the political class, an issue only becomes important when it has the mass support. It seems locally there is no support for the movement in and around Bodh Gaya and a majority of the support that the issue has galvanised, is from outside. The Buddhist movement initiated by Baba Saheb Ambedkar has not reached diverse Dalit communities in India. Politically, all Bahujan parties do pay tribute to Lord Buddha and speak about Buddhism’s importance, but on the ground, their politics does not reflect the same commitment. Thirdly, even among the Dalits, it is mostly the Mahars and Jatavs who have embraced Buddhism and rest of the communities and leaders have not shown much inclination to it. For the OBCs, it does not concern much at the moment though exceptions are there but they are too small to impact the majority. Finally, there are also the cultural differences between the Buddhists from other regions and the Ambedkarite approach to it who have been aggressively speaking against the ‘Brahmanical’ onslaught on it. The non Ambedkarite Buddhists approach is through matured political dialogue with the government as it does not necessarily consider Hindus as adversary but for Ambedkarites Buddhists, aggressive critique of Brahmanism is the main theme of Buddhism. There are other issues of leadership of the movement too. People are missing Bhadant Nagarjun Surai Sasai who had once, , decades ago. Today, age has limited his political activism though he remains active in Maharashtra.

Two approaches can resolve the issue. One is if the Supreme Court takes note of it and gives direction to the Bihar government. Second, by Narendra Modi himself, who has been persistently using Buddhism as a symbol of India’s soft power, the world over. He participates in most Buddhist festivals and speaks greatly about Buddhism globally whenever he meets world leaders. Buddha is India’s biggest global influencer and one is sure that the government understands it. The government can call an all-party meeting and resolve the issue. This is not an issue which cannot  be resolved. Unlike Ayodhya, the issue is not really that of the origin and historicity of the temple but about its management which rightfully belongs to Buddhists.

Whether there are political movements or not, the government of India must take notice of this issue and provide a helping hand to the Bihar government, towards a resolution.

Buddha and Buddhism are India’s most powerful symbols of soft power. If the government has positive intent, it can resolve this issue peacefully and democratically. Will this, however, actually happen?

Related:

Bodh Gaya: Why the Mahabodhi Temple must be handed over to Buddhists

Religious Desecration: Who’s responsible for destruction of early Indian, Buddhist places of learning in Odisha?

The post Mahabodhi Vihar, Gaya: a conspiracy of silence across the political spectrum appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In 2013, the government of Bangladesh introduced a policy for the socially and economically disadvantaged communities and categorised them into three types- Dalit, Harijan, and Bede. The policy defines ‘Harijan’ as “people who are known as ‘harijan’ in the society and do not hesitate to introduce themselves as ‘harijan’” (Department of Social Service, 2013)[i]. It is tragic that most of these communities still remain at the margins and government and activists still bear the name which has been widely rejected by the same communities in India.

Immigrants without any identity

The Dalit question in Bangladesh has remained highly unaddressed, just like in Pakistan where the entire issue is considered one related to ‘Hindus’ alone without fair representation in any field except in ‘sanitation work’. Though there is no official data about the exact numbers of Dalits in Bangladesh yet roughly it is estimated to be between 5.5 million to 6.5 million. The Bangladesh Dalit narrative now excludes the native Bangla speaking communities like Namashudras who have been better represented and ‘well off’ relatively to the immigrant Dalits though it is also a fact that Bangladesh too does not have any constitutional safe guard for Dalits on the question of representations in the government services and within politics.

The Dalit movement in Bangladesh is still at its nascent stage. The native Namshudras do not feel part of it. Many Bangladeshi Dalit leaders have accused members of the Namashudra community behaving like caste Hindus and practicing untouchability against them. So, the Dalit movement in this country has emerged out of the basic needs of the ‘migrant’ untouchable communities. It is important to understand that the ‘term’ migrant is being used for non-native Bengalis who were brought in to Bengal by the British in 1870.

The non-Bengali Dalit groups who generally speak in Hindi, Utkal, Deshwali and Telegu had migrated into or were brought in to East Bengal before 1947 from Uttar Pradesh (UP), Andhra Pradesh, Rajasthan, Bihar, Orissa, and Madras. They worked as cleaners, tea gardeners (1853-54), jungle cleaners, and other cleaning jobs in the middle part of British Rule (1838-1850).

To be frank, the British brought in these different groups particularly the Sweepers in to Bengal from not only Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Bihar, Odisha but also from the southern states like Madras Presidency. Unbeknown to many, a number of people living in the slums of Dhaka are Telugu speaking who migrated from Andhra Pradesh, in past part of Madras Presidency. Most of the menial sanitation work was done by these communities hence they faced not only contempt but isolation due to nature of their ‘job’. Interestingly, the Dalit movement too is divided at multiple levels: not merely on the basis of native Dalits and Dalit immigrants but also among the immigrants themselves, wherein those engaged in sanitation work are also categorised as ‘Harijans’.

Sanitation workers or Safai Karmcharis include communities engaged in manual scavenging: Raut, Hela, Hari, Dome, Domar, Telegu, Lalbegi, Banshphor, Dusadh, Chhatraira, Balmiki, and others.

The other Dalit Communities in Bangladesh

Apart from the Sweepers, there are five other categories of Dalits in Bangladesh. They are following:

Tea Plantation Workers: Bangalee, Bauri, Robidas, Tanti, Khodal, Karmokar, Bhumij, Bihari, Nayak, Mridha, Bakti, Chasha, Ghatuar, Goala, Gour, Kumri, Mushohor, and others:

Leather Processing Workers Rabidas, Rishi and others

Pig Rearing Kaiputra or Kwara

Brick Kiln Workers: Kol, Rajbhar and others

It is not that the native Bangla people do not face discrimination but the differences seem to be growing. The Bangali Dalits are those who are native like Namashudras and others, still well represented in the services, jobs and educated in comparison to immigrant ones. Secondly, all of them are actually more organised on community lines and not as a ‘Dalit’ which actually is just a decade old phenomenon.

Non-Bengali Dalits

The non-Bengali Dalit groups who generally speak in Hindi, Utkal, Deshwali and Telegu migrated or brought in to East Bengal before 1947 from Uttar Pradesh (UP), Andhra Pradesh, Rajasthan, Bihar, Orissa, and Madras. They worked as cleaners, tea gardeners (1853-54), jungles cleaners, and other cleaning jobs in the middle of the British Rule (1838-1850).

Telugu’ came from predominantly from Madras Residency and most of them were Mala, Magida, Chakali etc and are known as Madrasi. Most of them live in the slums of Dhaka and tea gardens of Sylhet and other such areas. The number of Telugu speaking Dalits is not less than 40000 in Dhaka.

The other Dalits who migrated from United Province are known as Kanpuri as most of them hailed from Allahabad and Kanpur. Bihari’s are already known as Bihari, a term also used contemptuously: Bihari Muslims were also considered against the liberation movement.

A number of Native Dalits actually migrated after Jogendranath Mandal had openly supported the Muslim League call for a separate nation. In fact, places like Sylhet today are in Bangladesh because of massive campaign carried out by Mandal during the referendum. Interestingly, the Muslim majority areas like Karimganj actually voted for being part of India! In any case, the Bangladesh Dalit and Excluded Rights Movement says, Dalits in Bangladesh can be divided into two groups. A section of Dalits who were brought to the country during the British rule to work as cleaners and forest clearing and tea plantations. And, another section who have been children of this country for thousands of years but are considered as ‘low caste’ in the eyes of the so-called society based on birth and profession. These are the fishermen, barbers, washermen, blacksmiths, cobblers, Kalu, Majhi, Zola, butchers, hunters, gardeners, Bede, Dhuli etc. Dalits are considered upper caste in the mainstream society and untouchable by others. Despite their significant contribution to the country’s economy, environment, and social development, they are the most economically and socially deprived Dalit community.

Is the issue of caste discrimination an internal matter for Hinduism in Bangladesh?

The crisis of Dalits in an Islamic society or where the Muslims are a majority showcases a kind of betrayal of the entire ‘ideology’ of the Dalit-Muslim alliance which the Muslim League actually purported to profess during its Partition movement, to ensure that a preponderant region/areas from both Punjab and Bengal become part of Pakistan.

History thus teaches us this lesson: that Dalits and minorities whether it is Muslims or Hindus, are only safe under a secular constitution. Once the constitution becomes theocratic and appeases majoritarianism, there are scant chances of the minorities getting any success. Dalits in both Bangladesh and Pakistan actually faced a dual (double) victimhood. First, they were a minority and then they were also Dalits. It is not that the Muslims loved them and provided them respect. The sanitation work in Pakistan as well as Bangladesh is purely ‘reserved’ for the Harijan communities. There are pockets where untouchability does not exist while in a majority of the northern areas like Dinajpur, Rajshahi, Khulna etc., they do face untouchability. People from the Harijan community are not allowed to drink tea or eat at the hotels in many places, says 85 year-old, Manek Lal Dom, from Bhola. He adds that they don’t face discrimination of any kind within Bhola because a number of persons now working as sewage cleaners there hail from the Muslim community too.

The Bihari Dalits or Bhojpuri Dalits who migrated to undivided Bengal were actually invited or taken by the British as sweepers, cleaner, tea plantation workers, labour for picking up dead bodies and doing all kinds of menial work. They came here leaving all possessions. The only thing they had with them was their ‘faith’, they had otherwise nothing to own. Most of them came to Bangladesh in 1930s. Manek Lal Dom’s grandfather came here as a sweeper and he was born in Bhola. Now, Bhola is the largest island in Bangladesh in the Bay of Bengal.

Unlike in India and to some extent in Nepal, the Dalit movement in Bangladesh has to function within the periphery of ‘majoritarian politics’.  In Pakistan, most of them are used to portray Hindus as the worst kind of racists as well as by confining injustices s those ‘inside’ Hinduism. Some Pakistani organisations even organize Ambedkar Jayanti events every year and invite Ambedkarites and other human rights scholars to speak. Interestingly, the entire event is not focused at helping the Dalits in Pakistan but becomes a tool of anti-India propaganda resulting in neglect of the local Dalit activists and leaders. In Bangladesh, the situation is slightly bit better as civil society mobilisation in Bangladesh has been far superior to Pakistan. However, the Dalit movement still does not have autonomy as it has in India especially because it lacks the strength to organise resources at their own. There are administrative issues too. The presence of Dalits particularly the Bhojpuri speaking immigrants, Harijans, Rabidasis, inside Bangladeshi Parliament or in various structures of state is almost nil.

Dalits not even a minority

Dalits are not even a minority in any true sense. Minorities have a right to own their language, establish their institutions, and press for an inclusive politics among others. The Bhojpuri minorities in Bangladesh do not even know their native language. The only thing they have is their ‘traditional’ festivals and family events. They speak in Bhojpuri and can sing Bhajans. They have their own temples in certain places and they worship but cannot either read or write Bhojpuri or Hindi. Bangladesh came into being for the language movement, yet it is ironic that it does not care to protect the languages of those who immigrated? Frankly, Dalits are not even considered equal citizens otherwise this question would have always raised that they must have their own language and schooling in their native language schools. A majority of them are thoroughly landless.

Manek Lal Dom’s grandfather migrated from Darbhanga in Bihar to undivided Bengal. He was born in Bhola, Bangladesh’s biggest island on the Bay of Bengal. They were responsible for maintaining the cleanliness in the city. The work was harsh and harder. Since the 1930s, till this day in Bhola, Manek Lal Dom lives in a rented house. This is a government rented house for which they pay about 80 Taka per month. Plus of course, more than a 1000 taka for electricity and 500 taka for water too every month. This from a salary of TK 6000 per month. Imagine, a family that came over more than 100 years ago, but still does not have a house of its own to live. That result is people living in the street or open spaces.

Biggest victim of state sponsored eviction

Actually, ‘Harijans’ in Bangladesh face the threat of eviction as they don’t have any residential papers and live at the ‘mercy’ of the state. The fact of the matter is that during the partition, a large number of refugees including the Dalits came to India from East and West Pakistan but the sanitation workers were not that fortunate as leaders wanted them to be there. If they are not there then who would clean their toilets, is said to be an argument of a ‘great leader’ during the partition movement. The gross failure of the respective governments everywhere is that the city cleaners never got the right to a life with dignity. Rather than honouring their hard work and acknowledging the discrimination they face daily both at the hands of the authorities as well as common people, Hindus and Muslims alike, these Harijans face threat of evictions any time. An eviction happened in Dhaka’s famous Miranzila Harijan colony on June 11, 2024 where they had been living for generations. “Although the authorities claimed they will evict 87 families, they are planning to evict more than 120 families,” said Nirmal Chandra Das, secretary general of Bangladesh Harijan Oikya Parishad.[ii]

As a research paper narrates the story of Dalit ghettoisation within Dhaka. ‘The Dalits have been ghettoised in 27 hubs (12 are prominent) in and around Dhaka. A very few of them could establish their career outside the precincts. They are not unified as they have internecine strife, which is an obstacle before obtaining enough social capital to secure their collective interests. As a result, they could flourish themselves as successful individual entrepreneurs.  The Dalits of Bangladesh (experience) regimented patriarchy. But in Dhaka the women enjoy relatively more freedom. This opens another frontier of dilemma. They become educated, and due to the open media, they know the world faster, but finally, they discover that their world is confined to their precinct. They discover their capability failures and newer types of intersectionality every day.  “It is better to be born an idiot, rather than handicapped conscious beings”- said a Dalit girl to me. Her name was Anuradha. I heard it with a friend and sighed’[iii].

Many people might ask, why can’t these people stay elsewhere? Why do they live in the slums of Dhaka? I have visited these slums in Dhaka and can only say that the circumstances that they live is simply ‘unliveable’. Most of the time, they are surrounded by filthy water where mosquitos and other insect fly around and a heavy stink make things impossible to stay on. I saw the similar conditions in Bhola when I visited Manek Lal Dom’s house. There was no electricity. Dom said that they can’t any house on rent outside as none of the owners want to give them house on rent so most of the people end up staying on the street and roads as they don’t have the capacity to buy a house for themselves.

Imagine a community which was brought to clean human excreta has not got a place to live and frankly live as non-citizens of the country. If even after working for nearly 40 years, the salary is 6000TK then it reflects a highly iniquitous social order. When the issue of Dalit was being used as a Hindu subject then why have the leaders of two independent countries not pushed for a better lot for them? They could have shown, by example, that societies which are Islamic do not recognise birth-based differences and that they would do their best to bring the marginalised to the mainstream, but that never happened.

A report in Bangladesh suggested that many of the ‘Harijans’ are now changing their names as well as surnames so that they are not identified by caste. The report says the Telugus are now using the title, to be seen as a native Bangladesh. I witnessed this in Bhola too where most of the youth had Bengali sounding surnames. The friend who took me various places and son of a Bhojpuri Harijan put down his surname as De. When he came to the hotel to meet me, we were speaking in English and he was speaking with my Bangladeshi friend in Bangla. After some time, I realized that he was not well versed in English. These friends asked me whether I understand Bangla to which I replied that I can understand a bit. After some time, I just casually asked whether he understand Hindi or watch Hindi movies or serials which are popular. I was shocked to hear that this friend told me that he knows Hindi well and his ancestors came from Darbhanga in Bihar!

‘The Global Forum of Communities Discriminated on Work and Descent, report 2023 entitled ‘The Situation of Dalits in Bangladesh: Country Report says that, ‘ The literacy rate among male and female Dalits is 48.3% and 38.7% respectively which is far behind Bangladesh’s national literacy rate of 74.66%. Most of the Dalits live in designated housing settlements built on common land i.e. Khas land and 56% of Dalit households do not have any land.[iv]’

Unprotected and isolated

The biggest crisis for the sweeper or the Harijan community in Bangladesh is that the state has no protection for them. No encouragement to enter services other than sanitation work. The community itself has been pushed into the margins, limiting their struggle to better housing and more sanitary jobs in various government services including municipalities or big city corporations. While the ‘reports’ always try to suggest that it is only the Hindus who discriminate against them, none else. A very similar approach by Pakistani Dalit Rights groups is evident, too, who feel comfortable narrating the Brahmanical history a ‘Dalit’ without ever questioning their own rulers and authorities on the steps taken to combat structural discrimination. In fact, no report in Bangladesh has, so far, spoken about the job reservation for the Dalit community, particularly Harijans, in non-sanitation work. In fact, today, that job too is under attack: similar to various municipalities in India, it has been reported that a number of non-Harijans pay money to get the better paid sweeper’s job in various municipalities and government offices and then sublet the work to the Harijans on petty remuneration. In fact, due to these irregularities Sheikh Hasina government promised to ‘ensure’ 80% reservation in the sanitation work for the Harijan community. This was opposed and the so called ‘revolution’ in Bangladesh actually created more insecurity among Dalits particularly the Harijan community as they are not clear whether there will be a protection for their job in government departments particularly for sweepers as well as sanitation work.

Babul Das (56), a sweeper from Madarbari Shebok Colony in Chittagong, said: “Our children do not get white collar jobs even though they have the qualifications. It would console our heart if even one of us got an official job. But unfortunately, this never happens. Sweeping is the only profession, no matter whether we want to stick to it or not. Our destiny is sweeping, though this too is uncertain nowadays[v].”

Ironically, the stigma, discrimination continues to ‘track’ them despite living in a different society. The issue of Dalits is not merely that of being part of a hierarchical Hindu caste order but those who claim not to have anything to do with the caste system and birth-based discrimination, actually, have to answer more as the conditions under their leadership and society is perhaps worse. Dalits in Islamic Bangladesh and Pakistan, have no voice of their own.

A newspaper report in Bangladesh says, ‘Brought into the Bengal region by the British government from Madras, Kanpur, Hyderabad and some southern areas of what is now India, this sweeper community consists of people who are known as Harijans. They were chosen for the job and brought here as cleaners because of their status as ‘Dalits’ or ‘low class’ Hindus. Although they left their place of origin, the stigma surrounding their identity did not leave them[vi]’.

While I was not able to visit these localities in Dhaka myself, other researchers have found out that ‘Dhaka city has six sweeper colonies where they live a vulnerable life. These are: Ganoktuli, Dayaganj, Dhalpur, Sutrapur, Agargaon and Mohammadpur sweeper colonies[1].In Dhaka city, the Telegu  Sweepers are the large in number, they are concentrated mainly in four ghettos or quarters, known as :(1) Wari or Tikatuli Sweeper quarters; (2) Dhalpur Sweepers quarter, officially named city Palli; (3) Gopibag sweepers quarter, and (4) Muhammadpur Sweeper quarter. All the quarters are located within the perimeter of Dhaka city[vii].

There are few other areas, for example, Wari (Tikatuli), Babu Bazar, Dhalpur, Gopibagh and Mohammadpur, where the Harijan sweepers are largely concentrated. Over one lakh sweepers live in the Ganaktuli Sweeper Colony located on a piece of 20 acres of land by the side of the Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB) Headquarters at Pilkhana[viii].

It is equally important to know that most of the ‘Harijans’ did not migrate to East Bengal, as it was then called during pre-partition days but were taken there, either by the Mughals in the 16^th century or later by the British in the 19^th century. Motive: to carry out sanitation and sweeping work for their cantonments and other institutions of the Raj.

‘In the nineteenth century, for example, fifty sweepers were brought from Kanpur by the British Government to clean public toilets which were constructed in Dhaka for the city dwellers by the Ordinance No. 7 of 1870. In 1905, however, more sweepers were required with the establishment of Dhaka as the capital of East Bengal. The sweepers used to carry out the task of cleaning the city on daily basis.[ix]’

Absence of concrete data  

Ironically, we don’t have exact figures for manual scavenging in Bangladesh. If you ask activists, most of them will deny its existence but the fact is the entire country does not even have the flush toilet system. If that is the reality, how does the entire sewage system work? We also have not seen any sewage system reports or any of deaths in sewage cleaning operation in Bangladesh. A report published last year by Down to Earth, actually revealed that manual scavenging still persist in many parts and most of those engaged in it are those who were brought in by the British from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.

‘There are around 800-1,000 Dalits in Lalmonirhat (Rangpur division).They are all involved in activities related to sanitation. Some 50-60 are actively engaged in manual scavenging. Their ancestors were non-Bengalis who were forced to migrate from the northern and southern parts of India (present-day Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh) to East Bengal (now Bangladesh) under the pretext of permanent government jobs by the British before the 1947 Partition of the subcontinent’[x].

Sadly, there is no data or monitoring of death in sewage or septic tank as well as number of people engaged in manual scavenging. A research paper reported that ‘Total 136 person died in 5 years from 2014 to 2018 in Septic Tank according Bangladesh institute of labour studies’[xi].

Glossy reports –to the contrary–suggest that Bangladesh became almost open defecation free in 2019.

Bangladesh is almost open defecation free (about 99% achieved). Basic sanitation coverage is 64%, safely managed sanitation is currently 36.4% in rural areas. (Source: Multi Cluster Indicator Survey, MICS, 2019 report by BBS and UNICEF)[xii]. World Bank data too show that there is zero open air defecation in Bangladesh[xiii] but a report published by Daily Star, Dhaka says that while Bangladesh has definitely succeeded in reducing the open-air defecation yet, this has not reached at zero level. Actually, such reports that Bangladesh has succeeded in achieving the target of zero open air defecation have been appearing in the global media since 2016 but the reality is far from this. If NGOs, academics and activists make this a priority concern, a different story could emerge, as evident from the account published by Daily star, Dhaka, which says ‘Over 21 lakh people in Bangladesh engage in open defecation in the absence of public toilets, raising the risk of health hazards via the transmission of a wide range of diseases, says a Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics report. It further says that, the number of people practicing open defecation in Rangpur is 7.35 lakh, while it is 1.24 lakh in Dhaka’[xiv].

Bangladesh Dalits and the Excluded Rights Movement

The Bangladesh Dalit and Excluded Rights Movement is working harder to empower the Dalits and Harijan communities. The effort is not merely movement based but also provides decent alternative to the community engaged in sanitation work. It is working deeply in the communities in different parts of the country and new young leaders are emerging from the community. BDERM also used international solidarity and has presented reports on the conditions of Dalits at the international forums too. However, it needs to be careful and could expand its reach if the movement grows in diversity and autonomy followed by building up a confederation of various organisations working on the issue. Of course, the approach should not confine to merely ‘agitational work’ but also positive work, skill development as well as ensuring their representation in government services, educational institutions and most importantly seeking their involvement and engagement in non-sanitation or non- sweeping occupations. BDERM has been net-working with international solidarity as well as Indian organisations like Safai karmchari Andolan but also building up national solidarity and doing advocacy for the rights of Harijans with the government. BDERM has a network of over 17 NGOs and 2000 individuals and has been working at the international forum along with International Dalit Solidarity Network. They have been demanding a National Dalit Rights Commission but things have not moved much. Bangladesh must also think of enacting an Anti-Untouchability and Anti-Manual scavenging law but that would only be possible if the activists and the government think that the issue is serious and requires this. If they instead all remain in denial mode then, it this becomes difficult. For that to happen, academics, media, NGOs, social movements must focus on gathering data and monitoring violation of cases particularly related to untouchability, manual scavenging, septic tank or sewage deaths and other issues of those working as sweepers in municipalities and other private and government institutions.

The new Dalit movement in Bangladesh is making every effort in the right direction but it needs more strength to build a community leadership. Intellectuals and activists cannot satisfy themselves by dismissing this as a ‘caste system’ and the ‘internal problems’ of Hindus. They are citizens of Bangladesh and need full protection. So far, I found the demand by them was for a dignified housing and government job as Safai Karmcharis, for which the earlier government had fixed a quota of 80% for the Harijan community. Even this is not implemented. The result is non-Harijans are getting jobs which are relatively better paid but keep the children of Harijans as absentee cleaner, a practice very much prevalent in India too.

Moreover, as we demand in India, the government must ensure reservation for children of Harijan communities in the non-sanitation work. They must get equal opportunity to progress and for that their children must get preferential treatment in the form of affirmative action. Most importantly, government must prohibit the use of the term Harijans, which is purely demeaning and also the biggest mental block of the community to think beyond sanitation work. Right now, the threat is to their livelihood through mechanization as well as hijacking of their jobs by others through corrupt practices. All reports suggest they face the biggest threat of eviction and a majority of them despite living there in the third or fourth generation do not have a house of their own.

For long the issue of Dalits has been side tracked but now the situation demands the government focus on their emancipation through constitutional provisions banning untouchability and caste discrimination in all forms and practice. Some positive measures need to be taken including job reservation, education, health, housing and land redistribution. Will the Dhaka government act and respect the sacrifices of the Harijan community people who make Bangladesh clean and yet do not have access to safe and clean drinking water and living conditions? Let us hope that the government of Bangladesh will act positively and provide dignified alternative to one of the most marginalized communities, called Harijans in Bangladesh.

[i] Social Exclusion and Multiple Discriminations of Harijan Community in Rajshahi, Bangladesh by Goelam Mohammad Nur, Md Redwanur Rahman, S M Shaffiuzzman and Kamrun Nohar Sona. https://www.ijcrt.org/papers/IJCRT2309644.pdf

[ii]  No Home for Harijans by Md Abbas, Daily Star, June 11,2024 https://www.thedailystar.net/news/bangladesh/news/no-home-harijans-3631801

[iii] The Dalits in Dhaka: where the society has doubled their marginalization, 24.10.23 – Dhaka, Bangladesh – Pressenza New York,  https://www.pressenza.com/2023/10/the-dalits-in-dhaka-where-the-society-has-doubled-their-marginalization/

[iv] Situation of Dalits in Bangladesh : Country Report 2023

https://globalforumcdwd.org/landmark-report-documents-harsh-reality-of-cdwds-of-bangladesh/

[v] Tanvir Hossain, Daily Star, Dhaka March 19, 2013 https://www.thedailystar.net/news/the-sweepers-a-socially-excluded-community

[vi] Beyond destiny: The new generation at Dayaganj sweeper colony look forward to a different future by Aziz Hakim, August 30, 2022, The Business Standard, Dhaka

https://www.tbsnews.net/features/panorama/beyond-destiny-new-generation-dayaganj-sweeper-colony-look-forward-different

[vii] Human Rights Conditions Of Horizon (Sweeper), Community In Dhaka, Bangladesh, a legal review, 2010

https://www.lawyersnjurists.com/article/human-rights-conditions-of-horizon-sweeper-community-in-dhaka-bangladesh/

[viii] The Harijans of Bangladesh: Living with the injustice of Untouchability, by Prof Dr Md Rahmat Ullah, published by Empowerment of through law of the common people, Dhaka P 14

[ix] Ibid P 55-56

[x] In a corner of Bangladesh, manual scavenging is impacting a treatment plant’s sustainability by Sarim, Down to Earth, 9 January 2024.

https://www.downtoearth.org.in/water/in-a-corner-of-bangladesh-manual-scavenging-is-impacting-a-treatment-plant-s-sustainability-93793

[xi] Septic Tank accidents in Bangladesh are rising: Few facts and thoughts by Safwatul Haque Niloy, WASH Coordinator, OXFAM in Bangladesh, April 2024

379986519_Septic_tank_accidents_in_Bangladesh_are_rising_Few_facts_and_thoughts/link/66252f1cf7d3fc287472e944/download?_tp=eyJjb250ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIiwicGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIn19

[xii] People’s Republic of Bangladesh Country Overview 2020

https://www.sanitationandwaterforall.org/sites/default/files/2020-12/2020_Country-Overview_Bangladesh.pdf

[xiii] World Bank Data, Bangladesh

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.STA.ODFC.ZS?locations=BD

[xiv] 21 lakh people in Bangladesh practice open defecation: BBS, Daily Star, Dhaka, November 19, 2022 https://www.thedailystar.net/news/bangladesh/news/bangladesh-lags-behind-sanitation-3173416

The post The ‘Harijans’ of Bangladesh: Victims of constitutional neglect and social isolation appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Dr Biswas was born at a time when there was chaos and sharp communal polarisation of the pre partition era. He was born on February 6, 1946 in Baraichara in district Jessore, now in Bangladesh. He passed his matriculation in first division in 1962 from Bunagati High school, Magura. At the age of sixteen, he had to leave his home and come to Bongaon, now part of 24 Pargana district, West Bengal after traversing about 70 kilometres barefoot to his sister’s home there. There was swelling in the feet of the innocent boy and his sister washed them in hot water and put him with her children. The traumatised young boy taught the children of his sister in Bongaon. He graduated from Thakurnagar, again a place known to be related to the founder of Matua Mahasangha Guru Hari Chand. Later he was teaching in a school and preparing for various state exams and got selected in the West Bengal Civil Services and was appointed as an administrative officer, as Sub Divisional Magistrate. Later, he completed his Masters in Economics from Calcutta University and got selected in the West Bengal Provincial Civil Services and got appointed as Deputy Collector. His friend and senior at Thakurnagar college, Mr Amar Krishna Biswas, who is now retired informs that Dr A K Biswas was a very hard-working person who never shared his hardships with anyone. He was always working harder and aiming high.

In 1973, Mr Atul Krishna Biswas was selected by the UPSC in All India Civil Services examinations and got the Bihar cadre where he served in different capacities throughout his career. As a Member of Indian Administrative Service, he held charge as Sub Divisional Officer, District Magistrate, Divisional Commissioner and rose to the coveted positions of Principal Secretary, Home Secretary, Energy Secretary of Government of Bihar. He was instrumental in formation of university named after Baba Saheb Ambedkar and was appointed as the first Vice-Chancellor, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur.

Interestingly, his zeal and dedication towards education never ended.  He always pursued his interests. Though, there was no need for him to focus on education once he became a civil servant, qualified after his graduation. He actually completed his masters as a private candidate after he joined services and his thirst for knowledge did not end there as he followed it with his Ph.D. later. His dissertation on ‘Inland and Overseas Emigration of Working Classes in the Nineteenth Century from Bihar got him Ph.D awarded by Patna University.

Dr A K Biswas retired from his services in 2007 but started writing extensively on issues he felt extremely important. Though he was not in great health yet his convictions made him write lengthy pieces on the subject which have been either ignored or left out. On matter of Dalit question in Bengal, he was an undisputed authority.

His research articles got published in English and Bengali journals and magazines of repute. The Telegraph, Calcutta, The Hindustan Times, The Times of India, [Patna Edition], Social Scientist, Mainstream, Outlook, Velivada, Countercurrent.org, Frontier, etc.  carried large number of his writings on different occasion. Off late, he continued to write pieces in Mainstream and countercurrents.org.

Dr A K Biswas wrote several books since 1996. Some of his books are following

1. Social and Cultural Vision of India: Facts against Fiction, Pragati Publication, Delhi,1996.
2. Understanding Bihar, Blumoon Books, New Delhi, 1998.
3. The Namasudras of Bengal, Profile of a persecuted people, Blumoon Book, New Delhi, 2000.
4. Sepoy Mutiny and Indian Perfidy [1857-58] (Monograph) (1998)
5. Sati: Saga of a Gory Custom (Monograph) (1999)
6. The Namasudras of Bengal: Profile of a Persecuted People (Monograph) (2000)
7. A Study of Feudalism in Eastern India with special reference to Bihar (Monograph) (waiting for publication)
8. অন্বেষণ (ছদ্মনাম) শিপ্রা বিশ্বাস, কলিকাতা, ১৯৯৬।
9. স্মৃতিকথা [প্রকাশিত হবার মুখে]
10. বঙ্গ জীবনে অপরাধ এবং অপরাধপ্রবণতা—সামাজিক বিন্যাস[প্রকাশিত হবার মুখে]

He was busy writing his autobiography but one does not know whether that work got completed or not. He had been sharing ideas with me and was keen to work together on a conversation with me. I had requested him for a detailed interview which could be used in a book format. He told me that he would be happy to do so but only once his work in Bangla language is completed. In fact, he said that he had already responded to some of my questions that I had put to him. I hope the work that he had initiated with publishers would be out. His writings in Mainstream and countercurrents.org need to be compiled in book format so that people could understand the depth of his knowledge.

He was widely travelled person but most importantly he never lost touch with the ground. His writings reflected the power of his consistently looking for the original texts and documents. It would be important for us to have a relook at some of his writings. Right now, we are witnessing a movement regarding the Mahabodhi Vihar issue in Bihar. Dr Biswas was in a position to give a first-hand answer as he was Home Secretary, Bihar in 2005 when Principal Secretary to the President of India, Dr APJ Abul Kalam wrote a letter asking him to respond some of President’s concern about the rights of the Buddhists in relation to this Buddha Vihar. This is a very informative article which appeared in the mainstream on September 24, 2024 issue.

There is very little understanding about how Dr Baba Saheb Ambedkar was elected to Constituent Assembly from Jessore and Khulna constituency of Bengal. In an interview Dr Biswas told me, ‘Dr. Ambedkar, at that point of time, was a member of the Executive Council of the Governor General of India. With Independence was approaching, they needed to frame the Constitution, or write the Constitution for Independent India. Elections were held all over the country, so that members could draft Constitution for the new nation. The Congress Party was against Ambedkar, and they decided that his entry into the Constituent Assembly had to be stopped, or prevented. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, in one of his statements, said that we have closed the doors and windows of the Constituent Assembly, and we’ll see how does he enters in this house. He could not get elected from Bombay Presidency, his home province, so he was thinking of getting elected from Bengal, with the help of Anglo-Indian members of the State Assembly of Bengal. Few months before the election, when he came to Calcutta and tried to get their support, he was told that the Anglo-Indian members have decided first to not participate in the election, and second that they will not vote [for] anybody in the election. So, Ambedkar was pretty disappointed and went back to Delhi. At this point of time, Jogendranath Mandal invited Ambedkar to come to Bengal and contest the election. He was the MLC of the Scheduled Castes Federation of India founded by Dr. Ambedkar. And he was the solitary member of the Bengal Assembly. Just 21 days before the election, Ambedkar came to Calcutta, had a meeting with the supporters and volunteers of the Scheduled Castes’ Society here, after which he agreed to contest elections. Mandal proposed his name and Biswas supported or seconded his candidature for the election. Elections are held on the appointed day and as many as seven MLCs voted for Ambedkar. In fact only five MLCs were required for any person to be elected as the member of the Constituent Assembly. When the results of the first round were declared it was found that Ambedkar had secured the best number of votes from Bengal. Incidentally Sarat Chandra Bose, elder brother of Subhas Chandra Bose, got six votes, one less than Dr. Ambedkar. Thus, a new chapter of the history of the Dalit movement and the struggle that Ambedkar undertook all his life was brought closer to the logical conclusion, and that gave him the opportunity to reach Constituent Assembly and fight for the cause of the ‘untouchable’ people of this country.

The details of this issue may be accessed in his article published by Mainstream in its December 24, 2016 issue.

In another analytical piece, ‘A critique of mass education in Bengal: Ishwar Chandra Vidya Sagar and his hypocrisy. Dr Biswas brought out the fact that while Bengal is known for ‘legendary’ social reformers yet none of them were too keen to empower the Dalits and marginalised communities. In fact, a person like Vidyasagar felt that education of these communities could be harmful as they dissociate themselves with their traditional occupations.

A look at what Vidyasagar told Nabin Chandra Sen, a poet, and Deputy Magistrate of Bengal Government may be revealing. The Deputy Magistrate recorded in his autobiography: “It will be a good riddance, should the accursed policy of education get a burial. I have established a school in my village in consequence of which I’ve deserted native place. As soon as children of farmers and labourers learn muttering a few English words, they shun their ancestral occupations. They run amuck for fashionable dresses, shoes, socks, hats, etc. It is due to them that I am unable to go home. As soon as I reach home (Birsingha), I am invaded by parents of those boys. They start pestering me, “Oh! My venerable, Sir, what have you done? My ward is totally unconcerned about my farm. Half a bigha of my land remained untilled in the current season. How shall I meet the requirement of food for the family? Over and above, I have to foot bills for his fashionable dress, hats, etc. Someone says my cattle have died but my son does not care to graze them. I have committed sin for which I am undergoing penance. I have solemnly sworn that I shall never ever establish any other schools in countryside. In this land, nobody, after receiving education, engages himself in pursuit of his ancestral occupation. No sooner than one starts muttering few English words, he shuns profession of his forefathers, nay, even hates his parents.” The complete article may be accessed here.

‘How sitting orthodoxy killed millions’ is a brilliant and analytical article written by Dr A K Biswas based on various first-hand report of incident of Plague that spread across India between 1896-1930 killing 40-50 million lives. Most of those who lost their lives were caste Hindus, Brahmin, Rajputs and Banias while the least affected were Chamars, Valmikis and Muslims. He explains how Brahmanical orthodoxy led by Bal Gangadhar Tilak actually opposed measures taken to control the Plague.

He writes, ‘The measures, e. g., house to house searches, examination of occupants, evacuation of suspected victims of the plague to hospitals and segregation camps, removal and destruction of personal effects of such persons, prevention of plague cases from entering or leaving the city, etc. were adopted for prevention of plague [6] Soon a certain section started voicing acute grievances against these initiatives.’ Bal Gangadhar Tilak vociferously denounced the Plague Commissioner saying that “Her Majesty the Queen, the Secretary of State and his Council, should not have issued the orders for practising tyranny upon the people of India without any special advantage to be gained.” His abomination was that “the government should not have entrusted the execution of this order to a suspicious, sullen and tyrannical officer like Rand.” [7] Did Tilak prejudge the elaborate anti-plague measures in public interests under the leadership of Rand? The British ICS had taken up the charge in March as Plague Commissioner. Within three months in June 1897, he was assassinated. Only prejudice can drive a section against an officer engaged in challenging duties. The time to assess his worth was too limited to kill him. It was pure prejudice against him. The extraordinary situation warrants unprecedented measures also for results. Tantrums of a milch cow, goes a proverb, has to be tolerated.

A conspiracy for assassination targeting Charles Rand was hatched by some hot-headed youth like Damodar Chaupaker, Balkrishna Chaupekar, Vasudev Chaupekar, Mahadeva Ranade and Khando Vishnu Sathe alleging his insensitivity to native orthodoxy. On June 22, 1897, the Diamond Jubilee of the coronation of Queen Victoria was celebrated in Poona. In a bomb attack, The Plague Commissioner Rand was critically injured while his companion Lieutenant Ayerst died on the spot. Bal Krishna and Vasudev also murdered Ganesh Dravid and his brother Ramchandra Dravid on suspicion of being police informers for the murder of Rand and Ayerst. The government offered a reward of Rs 20,000 for apprehension of the assassins. The Dravid brothers were suspected to have acted out of greed for the cash rewards. But they got Rs 10,000 only, which earned the ridicule of popular Marathi journal Kesari that Tilak edited. Rand succumbed to his injuries on July 3, 1897. This was a strange historic event: the benefactors who were fighting plague were done away with by assassins. Damodar, Bal Krishna, Vasudev and Ranade, who absconded, were arrested, prosecuted and hanged. A teenage Khanderao Sathe, a school student, was sentenced to ten years rigorous imprisonment. Bal Gangadhar Tilak hailed the actions of Damodar Chaupekar and his compatriots as patriotic in his journal Kesri for which he was prosecuted for sedition. Sentenced to eighteen months of rigorous imprisonment, Tilak was confined in Mandalay’.

The complete article may be read here.

The death of Dr Atul Kumar Biswas is a huge loss for those who were looking forward for some outstanding articles and books from him. He was determined to write about all important issues that he felt have been historically ignored. His forte was in tracing the important official reports and documents which were powerful instrument of exposing the prejudices of the powerful casteist elite of India.

There was not much information about his sad demise and perhaps the reason for this was that he was not member of any ‘organised’ group of ‘intellectuals’ or ‘activists’. These days, if you are autonomous and independent outside any organised group then the chances of isolation are more. Moreover, their families need to know about their creative activism. It is essential because admirers like me could only get the information of his death, nearly three four days later.

Though Dr A K Biswas wrote extensively about various issues confronting us particularly that belonging to the Dalits, he rarely spoke about himself. It took a lot of effort and time to get the information about his childhood and other struggle. The only people who could organise a tribute to him were his friends and admirers in Patna who organised a condolence meeting on March 1, 2025but this information remained confined to them. It is ironical that we know so much about the writing of the man but not about his own struggle. Of course, it is the greatness of Dr A K Biswas that he did not open up his personal pains and sorrows and moved ahead with his work.

One can only hope that his unpublished work will be out and shared with his friends and admirers. It is a personal loss for me as he would often call me and discuss various issues and his future planning. In the year 2017, I had a conversation with him but that time he was not feeling well or comfortable yet one can see him and remember him through his brilliant masterpieces.

My conversation with Dr A K Biswas may be viewed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTVUlECN24w

My sincere condolences to Dr A K Biswas.

Related:

Bodh Gaya: Why the Mahabodhi Temple must be handed over to Buddhists

Dr BR Ambedkar: How the ongoing tussle between the BJP and Congress is both limited & superficial

River Ganga, communities, cultures & livelihood: will Indians preserve its life-sustaining legacy?

The post Learned yet Forgotten: To Dr A K Biswas, a tribute appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It is also a fact that in later years as the Buddhist patrons lost their power to the Sena dynasty of Bengal followed by Mughal rule and invasion, the shrine remained ignored, even assaulted and ultimately got ruined. One of the greatest services to Buddhism in India was actually rendered by great British Surveyor Major General A Cunnigham as well as Indian archaeologist Dr Rajendralal Mitra and many others in the early 19^th century. It was they who were actually responsible for the restoration of the current site and numerous other Buddhist places previously just buried under the rubbles of the ruins.

Nobody has ever doubted that Bodh Gaya is the largest, most significant shrine of the Buddhist world. Several scholars in the past termed have regarded it a fit spot for pilgrimage, as pivotal as Mecca for Muslims, Badri-Kedar for Hindus and Jerusalem for Christians. Almost all the documents and research since the beginning has undoubtedly suggested that this is a Buddhist temple. The Bodhi tree is among the oldest trees of the world right at the sire, despite the fact that it was destroyed and uprooted several times; however it survived.

I am not going far into arguments of authenticity because unlike other religious ‘disputes’ in India, the issue of Mahabodhi Vihar as Buddhist temple has been a settled one. Right from British scholars to the British Indian administrator have treated it as a Buddhist place. The British handled this issue with great care and the negotiations and even at that point there was no questioning the ‘ownership’ of the land as claimed by Shankar Matth today. The Matth’s role was appreciated because it did not convert the shrine into a Hindu temple and also that Buddhists were allowed to worship there. So both the Hindus and Buddhists have been worshipping there in the vicinity of the complex where the Math has built Hindu temple too. Here is what the Bengal District Gazetteer of Gaya, 1906 says about Bodh Gaya and Mahabodhi Vihar.

‘The temple was originally a Buddhist shrine but for a long time past, it has been in the possession of a Hindu Mahanth belonging to an order founded by the bitterest enemies of Buddhism. It has fallen into complete ruin and would have soon disappeared had not government restored it at its own cost, in consequence, they maintain a custodian for the care of the building and to see to its repair. The Mahanth controls the worship and receives the offerings made by the Buddhists and the Hindu pilgrims. Government maintaining an attitude of impartiality on all religious questions affecting the shrine. The Buddhists performs the rites of their religion at the shrine and under the Bodhi tree, just as Buddhists of different countries have done for centuries past and Hindus also make offering under the tree as it is recognized as one of the 45 of places which Hindu visit while performing the religious ceremonies for the salvation of their ancestors which centres around the holy city of Gaya. This Hindu reverence for tree is very old but by the side there is a Hindu cult of a very recent growth, as Hindu worship, which has been pronounced a spurious and unorthodox character, is offered at the shrine itself’[1].

About the historic Bodhi tree, it says,

‘this tree is the oldest historical tree in the world and has an eventful history. It was first cut down by Asoka in his unregenerate days but after he became a believer in the law of Buddha, he lavished an inordinate devotion upon it. His queen jealous of this attachment and grudging the jewel which Asoka offered to the tree, again had it cut down but for second time, it was miraculously, restored to life’[2].

Interestingly, Gurudev Rabindranath Tagore visited Bodh Gaya in January 1922 and was overwhelmed to see this Buddhist shrine. He is recorded to have said,

“I am sure it will be admitted by all Hindus who are true to their own ideals, that it is an intolerable wrong to allow the temple raised on the spot where Lord Buddha attained his enlightenment to remain under the control of a rival sect which can neither have the intimate knowledge of or sympathy for the Buddhist religion and its rites of worship. I consider it to be a sacred duty for all individuals believing in freedom and justice this great historical site to the community of people who still reverently carry on that particular current of history in their own living faith’[3].

While the British Indian government was trying to handle this issue carefully, it was the heroic effort of Anagarika Dharmapala, the Buddhist monk and scholar from Sri Lanka who campaigned for its restoration and internationalised it. Though Chinse travellers and scholars like Hwen Thsang, Faxian had already narrated accounts of the Bodh Gaya shrine centuries ago as well as Burmese Kings, who were already involved in its restoration, it was Anagarika Dharmapala who actually took the issue to United States as well as Japan. British scholars, excavators and archaeologists were already doing their work to maintain and restore various Buddhist sites in India. While Japan was a leading world power at the rime and its involvement really helped as the British authorities to take the issue more seriously. In a typical balancing act symbolic of colonial rule however, the British did not want to ‘hurt’ local sentiments as there was no doubt about the historicity of the site but no local population who could fight for it! Had Dr Baba Saheb Ambedkar been active or involved on the issue at this point of time then things would have been different. Unfortunately, without active local support, a community cannot battle a mighty cause such as this.

The appropriation or occupation of the Buddhist shrines by the Brahmanical elite in India historically happened with the steady decline of Buddhism due to a loss of power of Pala dynasty in the  12^th century as well as rise of Sena dynasty particularly King Sasank, who was a staunch opponent of Buddhism. Subsequently, many stories also make mention of various Mughal rulers and their local chieftains responsible for destruction of these historical places. Both the Indian National Congress and Hindu Mahasabha formed a committee with Babu Rajendra Prasad as its Convenor and passed a resolution on January 21, 1923 that read, “Babu Rajendra Prasad is authorised to investigate the proposal of placing the custody of Bodh Gaya temple in the Buddhist hands and to make report to this committee. Babu Rajendra Prasad is also empowered to coopt suitable persons in the investigations.”[4]

The Hindu Mahasabha of Bihar province too passed the following resolution dated April 6, 1925

‘Lord Buddha is one of the ten avatars of Hindus and the only deity whom the Buddhists worship.  The temple of Bodh Gaya is therefore a sacred place (teerth) for the followers of both the religions. And it is perfectly natural desire therefore, on the part of both the communities to keep this sacred place in their possession. Then at the present day both the communities’ resort to the place for worship and prayer.  People from both the communities’ desire that each one of them should be freely allowed to offer worship and prayer in its own peculiar way, according to its customs and   religious injunctions and that there should not be offered any obstacle in its way of doing so. This conference therefore is of the opinion that the Buddhists of India should be offered due share in the management of the temple and the arrangement of the offering of the worship therein. This conference appoints the following committee to make a report to the Provincial Hindu Sabha within three months as to the steps that should be taken to protect the common rights of both the Hindus and the Buddhists. It also requests the Mahanth of Bodh Gaya to render all possible help to the committee and a due and proper discharge of its duties. This resolution will have nothing to do with the properties attached to the Math of Both Gaya’. [5]

Unfortunately, despite all the noises made by the committee under Babu Rajendra Prasad, finally it concluded that the management of the shrine should be handled by a joint committee of both the Buddhists and Hindus together. There was another issue, which was important, the Hindu Mahasabha had suggested to keep the issue of the ‘ownership’ of the property outside the purview of the management!

The committee recommended based on the suggestion of Hindu Mahasabha ‘that the shrine be managed by both the Hindus and Buddhists and that the Mahant be the ex-officeo member for the ‘time being’. It also made it clear the issue of the property of Math has nothing to do with all this which means the property will remain with the Mahant. Though the Mahant claims to have a farman from Shah Alam but he could not produce anything to the committee. Mahadev Gir was Mahant from 1642 to 1682 and the time period of Shah Alam much later.

After independence the Bihar government brought the Bodh Gaya under the control of special management after passing a law Bodh Gaya Temple Management Act 1949. Under this act, the management of Bodh Gaya temple is defacto in the hands of Brahmins who happened to be a majority. There are four members to be appointed from ‘Hindu’ community and four from the Buddhist Community. The District Magistrate is the ex officio Chairman of the committee. Activist alleged that in most of the ‘temple management committees’, in India, the Brahmins get appointed overwhelmingly everywhere and Bodh Gaya is no exception to it.

UNESCO declared Mahabodhi Vihar as World Heritage site on June 29, 2002. The UNESCO citation says,

Criterion (i): The grand 50m high Mahabodhi Temple of the 5th-6th centuries is of immense importance, being one of the earliest temple constructions existing in the Indian sub-continent. It is one of the few representations of the architectural genius of the Indian people in constructing fully developed brick temples in that era. Criterion (ii) The Mahabodhi Temple, one of the few surviving examples of early brick structures in India, has had significant influence in the development of architecture over the centuries.

Criterion (iii): The site of the Mahabodhi Temple provides exceptional records for the events associated with the life of Buddha and subsequent worship, particularly since Emperor Asoka built the first temple, the balustrades, and the memorial column. Criterion (iv) The present Temple is one of the earliest and most imposing structures built entirely in brick from the late Gupta period. The sculpted stone balustrades are an outstanding early example of sculptural reliefs in stone.

Criterion (vi): The Mahabodhi Temple Complex in Bodh Gaya has direct association with the life of the Lord Buddha, being the place where He attained the supreme and perfect insight.

Now the question before us today is, that when all persons and parties who matter have no doubt about the historicity of Bodh Gaya Maha Vihar, what then is the obstacle in handing over to the Buddhists what is rightfully theirs?

As far as the Hindu Temple or the Matth is concern nobody beyond Bihar knows much about this so called Hindu Mandir at the site. Hindus have important pilgrim centres and temples. Gaya, which is 10 kilometres away from Bodh Gaya is considered to be an important place of Hindu worship and none question that. It was clear since the beginning that the Mahant claimed to have gained a Zagir or Zamindari from the Mughal kings and it was his source of income apart from two other temples.

Historically we also know well, how the Brahmanical lobby scuttled all efforts towards Zamindari Abolition, an issue so dear to then Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru. Zamindari Abolition act came in 1951 and it was mostly challenged in Bihar where Brahmins, Bhumihars, Kayasthas and Rajputs had large Zamindaris (tracts of land). People are misinformed when they believe that it was only Rajputs who owned Zamindaris: in Bihar and Bengal Zamindari was not the sole domain of Rajputs but Brahmin-Bhumihar-Kayasthas too had large Zamindaris in both states.

It was estimated that the Bodh Gaya Matth had over 18000 acres of land (many estimated it over 30,000 acres) and it was the main source of the Mahant’s ‘power’ which he wielded on the poor landless people, a majority of them Dalits particularly Mushahars, Doms, Bhuiyna and other backward communities. Jaya Prakash Narayan addressed a historic gathering of landless peasants and other political activists here on April 18, 1975. The Bodh Gaya land movement continued until 1987 when the Bihar government distributed 18000-acre land among 11000 landless farmers, a majority of them landless women and Dalits. Gaya, Bhojpur, Ara, Jahanabad remained the hotbed for the movement for land rights of the landless communities, mostly mobilised by the far left groups. One needs to understand why the religious-political nexus has always opposed land reforms and found different ways to circumvent land ceiling laws by forming various religious trusts.

At the beginning of 19^th and 20^th century, we did not have enough support for the cause of Buddhism except for that which came from the outside. Japan, China, Thailand, Burma and other countries were interested in Buddhism in the land of its birth and its shrines. All shades of political leaders have felt proud of India’s historical Buddhist past. Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru believed in Panchsheel. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been speaking about Lord Buddha with great reverence and even participates in Buddhist festivals and events. His government claims a ‘look east policy’ and most of our eastern neighbours are Buddhist countries that have great respect for India as it is truly the land of Buddha.  There will not be a political party which will oppose handing over the greatest shrines of Buddhist world over to the Buddhist community to manage and maintain it.

Before, I conclude, I wish to add this thought-provoking letter of Swami Sachchidananda Saraswati on February 1, 1926 as appeared in the Mahabodhi journal. One may agree or disagree with many of the observations but what is important to understand is his ultimate aim.

‘It is a great shame for all Hindus that they should allow an individual Saivite Mahant to control the greatest Buddhist shrine. Is it just and right? It is great surprise that some Hindus do not raise objection against the forcible occupation by an individual sectarian non-Buddhist Mahant of a temple erected in the memory of Lord Buddha, the only teacher of and revered by the whole Buddhists world of 500 million Buddhists. No Hindu can control any Christian or Muslim shrine by such an undesirable mean. This is a great injustice to Buddha, Buddhism and one third of the World Population which follows Buddha and Buddhism. So long as the Hindus, not to say of an individual non-Buddhist Mahant will keep control of the greatest Buddhist temple, the whole Buddhist world will look down upon Hindus and say that there is a great injustice in India. Therefore, I pray each member of the Indian National Congress and Hindu Mahasabha should take keen interest in the matter and do justice to Buddha and Buddhists. When the Indian National Congress demand complete swaraj from the British government which is due to the Indians Why should not the Congress too do justice by giving the transfer of the Buddhist temple to the Buddhists. We find in our Hindu scriptures that India was a great fount of justice and truth but at present I see with regret the groundless obstacles placed in the sincere and just attempt over the complete management of this greatest Buddhist shrine to its legitimate custodians. If anyone want justice from the others the former should first deal justice with others. In the Khilafat movement days, the Hindus helped Khilafatis, in the Akali movement days they helped the Akalis, why shouldn’t the Hindus help Buddhists to regain their holiest shrine?

The question is one of pure justice. If the Hindu Mahasabha will fail to do justice with the Buddhists. There is no doubt that the Buddhists will be morally affected and be far and far away from it. If it be the aim of All India Hindu Mahasabha, that all the people of different religion should give equal treatment to one another and live amicably with one another then it should give justice and equal treatment to Buddhism and Buddhists also and allow the latter to have the full management of their holiest shrine.

Therefore, let us, the Hindus, with our usual sincere and justice loving heart assure Buddhists of our unanimous opinion that we will give complete transfer of Buddhist temple to them. Let us be also assured that they will allow the Hindus to worship Buddha freely as they should do to Buddha and that neither the Buddhists nor the Hindus should offer fish or meat before the Buddhist statues. I further appeal to all the sincere Hindus that they should criticize the report and support impartially the Buddhists claim for the complete management of the Buddhist temple which is justly due to the Buddhists.

Swami Sachchidananda Saraswati,

Calcutta, February 1, 1926’[6]

A few years ago, when I met venerable Bhante Nagarjun Surai Sasai, a Japanese by birth but an Indian in action now and asked him about Bodh Gaya, he told me that it is the birth place of Lord Buddha. I was surprised and shocked when he said that. He explained this to me: Lumbini is the birth place of prince Siddhartha but it is Gaya that gave birth to Buddha hence Bodh Gaya Mahabodhi Vihar is the most sacred shrine for the Buddhists all over the world. Every Indian should be proud of this rich cultural heritage which the world acknowledges.

It is time for the government of Bihar to take a simple decision. The state government can call an all- party meeting and listen to their views. You can tell them the history of this movement and the archaeological findings. For too long has the far right Hindutva leadership asked Muslims to ‘respect’ Hindu sentiments? The Buddhist are asking the same from the Hindus. Will the Hindutva leadership, Congress as well as the Samajwadis learn a few lessons from their own past and correct them? All their top leadership has accepted and supported the Buddhist claim on the Maha Bodhi Vihar, Gaya. The Ambedkarite fraternity in India is already fighting for a peaceful solution through a democratic and law-abiding struggle. All the political parties and organizations that claim to represent Ambedkarite thoughts and people stand in complete solidarity with the Bodh Gaya Maha Bodhi Vihar movement. Will the Bihar government wake up and listen to the voices and reread its history to handover this shrine to the Buddhists.

Nitish Kumar hails from the JP movement and so does Lalu Prasad Yadav. Bihar’s landless people owe a lot to that historic Bodh Gaya Land movement which ultimately paved the way towards redistribution of the thousands of acres of land to landless people illegally occupied by the Matth. Buddhists have been wronged. Buddha and Buddhist past are India’s glorious heritage which makes us proud. Dalits and Ambedkarites were not before a strong force nor and Buddhism was in physical decline in India but Baba Saheb Ambedkar’s historic Deeksha ceremony on October 14, 1956 and subsequent efforts of the Ambedkarites actually revived Buddhism in India and today the number of Buddhists is increasing in both India and abroad.

Today, the Buddhists in India are ready to take this battle to its end. Buddha was a man of peace and non-violence hence the longer this struggle stretches the more bitter would become the relations between the Hindus and Buddhists. The government must ensure that such a bitterness is not allowed to spread widely and it will only be possible if the shrine’s management is handed over to Buddhists of India.

[1] Bengal District Gazetteers, Gaya by L S S O’Malley, ICS, Calcutta, The Bengal Secretariate Book Depot, 1906,  P 50-51

[2] ibid P-52

[3] https://www.telegraphindia.com/culture/books/rabindranath-tagore-a-poem-that-defined-the-buddha-and-sujata-stupa/cid/1818901

[4]    Mahabodhi and the United Buddhist World Volume 34, January 1926 No 1, P 2,

[5] Ibid P 4

[6] Mahabodhi : March 1926 Volume XXXIV     Volume III, Mahabodhi and the United Buddhist World Volume 34 P 165-166

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

Related:

Religious Desecration: Who’s responsible for destruction of early Indian, Buddhist places of learning in Odisha?

Land to the Dalit Tiller, not to Tycoons is our Mission: Jignesh Mevani

The post Bodh Gaya: Why the Mahabodhi Temple must be handed over to Buddhists appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Besides, Dalits and Ambedkarites do not set much store by gods and goddesses. The entire premise of Dr Ambedkar’s philosophy was that ‘religion should revolve around the concern for human beings’ and not for the ‘happiness’ of the ‘god’. As Buddha said, human philosophy should concern the welfare of human beings and that was the principle that the Charvakhas had, too. So, Baba Saheb’s real fight was not against either the Congress or BJP but against the Brahmanical Social Order (BSO). It is crucial to understand that there were people who stood firm against privileged caste domination and manipulation and those who supported the BSO within all parties.

In the midst of these pulls and pressures, movements and counter-moves during the struggle for independence, the Constitution making process was itself the single largest effort towards the reconciliation of Indian society with all its contradictions. Babasaheb Ambedkar understood this well, as did the Congress leadership of the time, particularly Nehru.

We all need to understand that Dr Ambedkar and the Congress Party had different paths and opinion but to rebuild India they joined hands. Interestingly Dr Syama Prasad Mookerjee, the leader of Bhartiya Jan Sangh (BJS) was also part of this. They had, amongst them, serious differences but none were so adversarial as to dub each other as anti-national or inferior. They debated issues in Parliament and agreed to frame the Constitution which emerged as one of the finest documents in the modern world, a document moreover that signalled India as one.

Unfortunately, the process of the selective quoting and referencing of events has harmed our polity today. This practice functions in the vacuous public sphere of overall ignorance and lack of grounding of sound democratic principles. How many of those speak today have understood the rich cadences of the Indian national movement?

It is crucial for all us, all of us, not use the events and differences of the time for our political purposes. Congress was an umbrella organisation for all those who fought for India’s freedom. After independence, many of these organisations that were part of the Congress originally, actually formed their own parties and groups. Naturally, they emerged as political rivals too. This should be seen as a healthy development as India, now a free nation needed different checks and balances that came from those in and out of power, those who had varying world views and perspectives. Both Dr Ambedkar and Syama Prasad Mookerjee were part of Jawahar Lal Nehru’s cabinet. Even when Gandhiji was murdered in cold blood on January 30, 1948, Syama Prasad Mookerjee dissociated himself with the Hindu Maha Sabha and remained in the Indian cabinet. None asked him to resign. His resignation came in 1951 after he became President of Bhartiya Jan Sangh (BJS). The resignation was based on the Nehru Liaquat Pact. Nehru, Ambedkar and Mookerjee were members of the same Constituent Assembly and cabinet and I am sure, despite their political differences they must have been acquaintances if not good friends, with a healthy respect for each other. Those were different times.

There are a whole lot of issues which need comprehensive analysis and not selective usage of symbols and facts. Babasaheb was unhappy on the issue of Nehru’s inability to get through the Hindu Code Bill in the Parliament but he knew well that it was not easy for him as many bigwigs from both within the Congress and Jan Sangh were opposed to Hindu Code Bill. The prominent among those who were deadly opposed to the Hindu code bill were Dr Rajendra Prasad, Pattabhi Sitarammaiya, K M Munshi, Purushottam Das Tondon, Dr Syama Prasad Mookerjee and various leaders of Jan Sangh, Hindu Mahasabha etc. Sardar Patel though in the middle, leaned towards those who opposed it. So, in terms of ideological unity, it was only Nehru and Ambedkar who wanted this progressive legislation to be passed.

As I said before, all these leaders were both highly knowledgeable and deeply respectful to each other. None questioned the integrity of others but they put forth their political points very powerfully. While Nehru’s credentials as a secular modern progressive nationalist was not ever questioned, Ambedkar and Mookerjee actually were raising the issues of safety of Hindus and other minorities in Pakistan which was not out of the box and was real.

Dr Baba Saheh Ambedkar fought his Lok Sabha elections from North Bombay and Bhandara on two different occasions and lost. That the Congress ensured his defeat is without doubt. As I said, they were political rivals. Who was responsible for making Babasaheb’s secretary stand in elections against him? Nehru? Perhaps, Praful Patel can provide an answer as his father was a powerful leader of the Congress. Perhaps, too many Aambedkarites can provide details about his work. Secondly, in the North Bombay seat, it was not merely the Congress but both the Communist Party of India as well as the Jan Sangh or Hindu Mahasabha that had also actually fielded rival candidates.

There is no doubt that Congress’s history in the subsequent years was in continual denial of Dr Ambedkar’s legacy. One needs also remember that Babasaheb used to call Congress the original Brahmanical party of India but what would he have had to say about the RSS-BJP in today? That the BJP has now replaced the Congress and is the perhaps the main Brahmin Bania party of India? This is the reality.

Now, the remains on who loves Dr Ambedkar and who does not. Who awarded him the Bharat Ratna? Certainly not the BJP. Nor the Congress. The man at the helm who accorded this honour, the Bharat Ratna to Dr Ambedkar was V P Singh, another hero who has been vilified by the Congress and Sanghis together. It is VP Singh who provided the reservation to Neo Buddhists too and got who also installed the prominent portrait of Babasaheb in parliament, got Ambedkar’s books published through the union’s Ambedkar Foundation, declared Babasaheb Jayanti as a national holiday and took several other steps.

Unfortunately, for both the Congress and the BJP –which was then supporting the National Front government headed by VP Singh from outside—decried these measures. Recently, an arrogant Brahmin spokesperson of BJP actually abused VP Singh, terming him Samanti or feudal. Frankly, the only other person who was active those days and did his work on spreading saheb’s thoughts was one of VP’s most trusted colleagues, the late Ram Vilas Paswan.

Let us not debate how big a memorial is now being built for Dr Ambedkar or how much you worship him. My simple question for the political leadership today is this. If you really believe in Dr Ambedkar’s ideology then please implement the Constitution in true spirit. Please undertake land reforms, redistribute land to the most marginalised, ensure free health services, right to education for all, stop the privatisation of our natural resources, implement reservations in true spirit and everywhere.

It is equally important to understand not to confine Dr Ambedkar to merely Constitution making alone because that way you actually see his historical role in critiquing Brahmanical Hinduism. Yes, he critiqued all Brahmanical text, gods and everything. That apart, if we believe his philosophy, then let us respect what he asked his followers at the historical Deekshabhoomi grounds in Nagpur on October 14, 1956, Dhammachakra Pravartan Diwas, in his 22 vows to follow the path of humanism, as defined by Lord Buddha.

In a true sense, if we really care for, value, Dr Ambedkar’s principles, then please stop telling us how you respect Samvidhan or how much land you have allocated to make his statue rather than redistribute land to landless people which has now been forgotten. Ensure free quality education for all and equally free qualitative health care for all.

We need an inclusive governance structure which reflects our diversity where each one of us can express our opinion without any fear or intimidation. Dr Ambedkar’s India will not, simply cannot be the model where regressive religious pontiffs lead us to the path of destruction. It must ensure the path for progressive humanist leaders to take us to the path of enlightenment.

It is time the state ensured welfare measures for the millions of oppressed Dalits, Adivasis Backward classes, from all ethnicities and religious identities and make this integral to our decision-making process.

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia

Related:

Sangh Parivar’s tortured bid to appropriate Dr Ambedkar

Iconoclast: Path breaking biography of BR Ambedkar projects his human essence

Ambedkar varsity ‘on brink of collapse’, 32 faculty members resign, 22 embroiled in legal battles

The post Dr BR Ambedkar: How the ongoing tussle between the BJP and Congress is both limited & superficial appeared first on SabrangIndia.