CHAPTER ONE

THE CASTE SYSTEM AND THE INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS

A study of the origin and nature of the caste system in India is

urgently called for before an attempt is made to have an in-depth
study of state intervention to secure scheduled caste welfare in
the state of West Bengal, a component unit of Indian federation.
The word ‘caste’ is of foreign origin, from the Portugese word
‘casta’ meaning race or breed, and is closely connected with the
Latin word ‘castus’ meaning pure or caste. In his working paper
Wadia1 observes that caste has come to mean a particular
hereditary social group basing itself on a rigid observation of the
caste customs, particularly in relation to marriage and food. The
caste is usually spoken of by the Hindus themselves as
‘varnashrama dharma’.2 In the ‘Vedas’3 there was no mention of
caste (‘jati’). In the ‘Apastamba Sutra’4 there are four ‘varnas’,5
the ‘brahmans’6, ‘kshatriyas’7, ‘vaishyas’8 and ‘sudras’9/1°.
Originally there were four castes, but afterwards they were divided
into an endless number of sub-castes, each distinguished from
the other in its customs, which did not allow any inter-marriage
and interdining between one sub-caste and another.

The caste system is the creation of the brahmans, who in the name
of Manu11, have built up the system with the four varnas by way
of mathematical ‘permutation and combination’. ‘Manusmriti’12,
the work of the brahmans, however, gives a very artificial account
of the origin of castes foisted on the ‘varnas’.13
In other parts of the world also the caste system exists, but it is
not so rigidly established or so complex and permanent14 as in
India. It is far from the fact that castes in India are based on the
specialization of occupations. Iravati Karve has rejected this
classificatory scheme of caste identification as being “too artificial
and illusory.”15 The brahmans in order to realize their interests
have created the castes. To quote Biswas Oneil the
11
brahmin could not now exist and could not have existed at all
without a caste!”16

“The caste system”, observes Chakladar, “should be viewed not

as a thing existing only in a Hindu society, it would be better to
call it an Indian custom as it is practised by the followers of
different religious beliefs, like those of Islam, Hinduism,
Christianity, Jainism and Buddhism. It is true that, despite
variations in degree, the evils of the caste system are noticeable
in all religions and communities of India as well as among the
converts to other religions who were originally Hindus.”17

Sherring traces the origin of the Indian caste system thus :

“Originally all Hindus were not merely of the same race but of
the same family, and in their earliest relationship were entirely
free from those great distinctions which have separated them
from many ages into numerous castes and tribes.18 It is in the
sacred books of the Aryans19 that early endeavours to classify
castes are to be found.20 The whole caste system is based on a
hierarchy with the brahmins at the apex, the shudras at the
bottom, the kshatriyas and the vaishyas standing in successively
in the intermediate position. The first three castes are higher
castes in gradation and are generally known as twice born,
because the members of these castes have a right to wear a sacred
thread, the investiture of this thread being looked upon as a
second or new birth. The shudras consisting of the vast majority
of the Hindu community are looked upon as having a very inferior
status and are not permitted to wear a sacred thread. Every person
who does not belong to any of the four castes is outside the pale
of the Hindu society, and is treated as untouchables”.21 Each unit
or caste in India is associated with one or more traditional occupations
and related to the others by means of an elaborate division of
12
labour. Each caste is supposed to pursue, within limits of its own
style of life, distinctive customs in matters of dress, diet, rituals
etc. In the traditional Hindu society there used to be legal and
ritual sanctions which prevented lower castes from imitating the
styles of life of the upper caste.22 With the extension of their
influence, the brahmans became jealous of their privileges and
endeavoured to circumscribe the duties of kshatriyas and vaishyas.
Those who would not submit to the ‘three estates’ were treated
as outcastes. Those inhabitants who conformed to the brahmanic
law received certain privileges under the name of the shudras.
Some scholars opine that the brahmans, being extremely selfish,
inserted the so-called ‘Purusha Sukta’23 into the Rig Veda24 itself
so as to give a religious sanction to the caste classification. Max
Muller observes that caste does not form a part of the teaching of
the Vedas; it differs in many respects with the Vedas, in metre,
language and grammar. The same observation is made by
Colebrooke who comments that the remarkable hymn ‘Purusha
Sukta’ is in language, metre and style very different from the rest
of the prayers with which it is associated. It has decidedly a more
modern tone.26 The very use of the word ‘varnashrama’ is
interesting. It refers to colour, distinguishing the fair-skinned
Aryans from the darkskinned ‘dasyus’.27 Chakladar believes that
feeling, sentiment or prejudice associated with colour is one of
the reasons for the caste system to grow. The white-coloured
Aryans, being eager to maintain themselves separate, took resort
to the caste system.28 The most respresentative lucid defence of
castes as a primordial reality has perhaps come from Louis
Dumont. An approach that is known as the culturological
approach finds its apogee in L. Dumont’s ‘Homo Hierarchicus’
that relies primarily on a textual or brahmanical rendition of the
caste system. The conscious model developed by Manusmriti,
Hegel and Weber was ‘cleansed’ of impurities by Dumont who
13
delinked all traces of economics and politics from the caste system.
The generic characteristic of the conscious model which Dumont
amplifies is the belief that the caste system conditions material
reality in its own image and is, therefore, an irreducible and
immutable given.29 It is suggested by him that the caste system
is independent of material conditions and political power. It can
only be overcome by a conscious abnegation of the status of
brahman, i.e., by caste action. The Marxist approach seeks to
unearth the material and historical roots of the caste system and,
in particular, it searches for those peculiar features of India’s
material history which were responsible for the genesis of the caste
system that contributed to its development. Marxism identifies
the caste system at the level of superstructure and does not
consider it as a primordial reality of the Indian society. It sensitises
us to the fact that as the caste lines are not the dominant factor,
caste loyalities are activated only sporadically and to the extent
that members of different class positions believe that they can use
them to their advantage. It advocates that the caste system
conceals the contradications between classes and provides a
rationale for the prevalent exploitative system. This system, it
prescribes, should be smashed in order to get rid of the caste
differences. To the Marxists the caste system is not a myth; it
justifies exploitation on the basis of the myth of natural
superiority.30

But this perspective has been jolted from within the Marxist school
by Maurice Godelier. He believes that the caste system exists at
the level of infrastructure and not at the level of superstructure.
This has given credence to the culturological belief that caste
constitutes a primary reality. Hence, casteism can be overcome
by caste action and not by class action. Godelier comes very
close to Dumont who rejects Marxism and considers the cultural
14
or intellectual construct superior to the Marxian model. Godelier
observes that caste-groups within the varna-based structure are
later integrated in response to the stimulus of professional
divergences. Castes of the Hindus in India thus bend to become
institutionalised. To follow the line of Godelier’s arguments, the
Indian caste system is an institution of functions in which a
hierarchy of causes mingles with a hierarchy of sub-group
institutions. The Indian castes are such that each of the varna-
system performs a ‘dominant group’ role in relation to the inferior
sub-group which follows the ranking of the caste hierarchy. The
occupational difference has sub-divided a particular varna-group
into various dissimilar sub-groups. The role-performance factor
has operated here as the divisive agent or stimulas. The varna-index or
varna-category here becomes meaningless, because a crude form of
occupational and territorial distribution has led to a partition of the same
varna-group into smaller, sometimes larger, groups compared to each
other within the same sub-structure. Thus, for example, the yadavs,31
looked down upon by the superior varna-group like the Thakura
(brahmins or kshatriyas), are found to be a dominant group because of
their economic affluence in a particular area. Such a peculiar interaction
takes place between the varna-groups supposed to belong to a lower-
status on the varna-scale of hierarchical ranking. Territorial factors also
interact. The Marxist category of class and the Indian category of varna-
based caste thus interact and such apparently queer intermingling of the
two variables may explain to a great extent the persistence of the Indian
caste-system as an institutionalized hierarchy. The brahmins, for
example, are sub-divided into brahmins proper and ‘bhumiar brahmins’
in areas like Bihar.32
Godelier not only tries to identify the problem, he also offers solutions to
the problem. He believes that until caste at the infrastructural level is
eradicated first, class analysis cannot be brought to bear on the Indian
reality.33
15
The Scheduled Castes - Social Position

At the lowest rung of the ladder of the Hindu society are people
called ‘untouchables’. 34 The Hindus in the upper strata consider
such people, generally engaged in sweeping, shoe making, pig
and poultry-keeping and the like, as untouchables. The English
word ‘untouchable’ is unacceptable by many of the odium
attached to it.

The word ‘harijan’ (literally children of ‘Hari’ or God) was given

currency by Gandhi who used to refer to the lowest strata of
traditional Hindu society as harijans, the people who are engaged
in manual work and particularly in occupations which are held to
be onerous.35

During the first phase of British rule the shudras were regarded
as people belonging to the ‘depressed classes’. In the 1931-
Census the depressed classes came to be identified as exterior
caste. It was the Simon Comission that for the first time designated
them as scheduled castes, i.e., castes mentioned in the schedule.36
It appears that the scheduled castes have evolved through three
phases of characterization spread over time -‘untouchables’,
‘depressed classes’ and ‘scheduled castes’. The last appellation
appeared in the table of seats appended under section 61 (25th
Schedule) of the Government of India Act, 193537. And this very
term has been adopted in the Constitution of India (1950). Article
366 (24) of the Constitution 38 defines the term ‘scheduled castes’
as such castes and races or tribes or parts or groups within such
castes, races or tribes as are deemed under article 34139 to be
scheduled castes for the purposes of the Constitution. There were
millions of ‘harijans’ in the Indian Union when the Constitution
was framed. Traditionally they were looked upon as social
16
outcastes (untouchables) and were denied a status worthy of
human beings. They lived in all parts of India segregated from
the rest of the communities, usually performing the most
dehumanizing and socially hated jobs.40 The scheduled castes or
harijans do not have a history of isolation comparable to those
of the scheduled tribes. They have been segregated rather
than isolated. Thus, whereas the tribal people are concentrated
in blocks, the harijans are scattered through every state and,
practically, every district. 41

The harijans occupied a curiously ambiguous position in traditional

society of India on the one hand, they were excluded from the
‘chaturvarna scheme’42 of the ideal model of Hindu society, but
on the other hand, they were an integral part of the local
communities. Apart from working as agricultural labourers, the
harijans provided a number of specialized services. They were
responsible for scavenging in general and in particular for the
removal of dead cattles; they made sandals and leather goods of
various kinds; they served as messengers and watchmen. In short,
the economy of the village would die in a very real sense without
the services rendered by its harijan inhabitants.43

The social order of the Hindus of ancient India was founded not
upon the western or comparatively modern democratic principle
of equality, but upon the conception of a social hierarchy based
upon caste. Though the Hindus attached the greatest importance
to the virtues of justice and impartiality, their conception was
deeply permeated with the notion of inequality among the castes
and sexes. The general principle adopted by the Hindu society
was that the rights, duties and liberties varied with caste or sex
and punishments and damages were matters to be determined by
the status of the accused or defendant and that of the complainant
17
or plaintiff.44
Attempts by the harijans to change their styles of life or assert
their civic rights are often resented even today by the upper castes,
particularly by the dominant peasant castes in the rural areas.
They were earlier prevented from sanskritizing their style of life
by a variety of negative sanctions. They were excluded from
temples, bathing ghats, wells and other public places. A large
number of civic rights, necessary preconditions of sanskritization
or upward mobility of any kind, were denied to them by legal and
ritual sanctions. The new courts established by the British during
its rule, for the first time, introduced the principle of equality before
the law and by doing so removed one set of restrictions in the
social life of the harijans.45

Article 17 of the Constitution of India has abolished

‘untouchability’ and the enforcement of any disability arising out
of it ‘shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law’.46
Distinction among castes and among classes has been done away
with by law, but everywhere it is still very much in existence. There
are numerous barriers to a cross over from one stratum to another
in the Hindu society. The reality of rigid social stratification makes
itself felt in the daily lives of the poor and the oppressed in general
and the untouchables in particular.47

Even the most progressive intellectuals, who declare themselves

to be the enemies of the caste system, are not often entirely free
from prejudice, and consciously or unconsciously they act in a
manner which gives a fresh lease of life to the caste system. It is
for the habit an individual inherited and the training imparted to
him that he feels deeply loyal to the caste group to which he
belongs.48

18
Ambedkar has noted that the Hindus do not regard the existence
of these castes ‘as a matter of apology or shame’ and they feel no
responsibility either for it or to inquire into its origin and growth.
On the other hand, every Hindu is taught to believe that his
civilization is not only the most ancient but that it is also in many
respects altogether unique.49

The Constitution of India has provided a number of arrangements

for protecting the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes from
the disabilities to which they have been cursed from centuries.
But, how far and to what extent these arrangements have yielded
results remain an issue to be explored even after a working of the
Constitution for a little over five decades.

The Indian National Congress and the Scheduled Castes

After the achievement of independence India has remained

involved in a sustained effort to establish a democratic political
system based on egalitarianism, majoritarian decision-making, and
social justice for improving the status of the seriously
disadvantaged minorities.50 The component parts of such
minorities . ' are mostly members of so-called scheduled tribes
and castes. At the lowest rung of the ladder of the Hindu social
hierarchy stands the people who are reverentially or
euphemistically referred to as harijans. The harijans, condemned
to perform the socially degraded tasks for earning their livelihood,
are uncharitably designated by people in the upper tier of the
caste-ridden Hindu society as untouchables.

Long before independence the Indian National Congress took

cognizance of the untouchables. In his Presidential address in
1909 in the Indian Social Conference Tikka Sahib of Nabha said
19
in unequivocal terms, “Whatever the origin of the caste may have
been in the present form it is a veritable curse which is proving
a great obstacle to the unity of the Indian nation. The castes and
sub-castes have so hopelessly divided the people of this country
that no real progress is possible as long as they exist.” Referring
to the untouchables Tikka opined that God had not made any
difference between so-called touchables and untouchables; “these
differences are our own make and introduced by selfish people to
promote their own interest.” He emphatically said, “Our aim must
be the ultimate dissolution of caste and freeing of society from its
fetters so as to give ample scope for individual action whereby a
man may be able to take his proper place in society. Therefore,
we shall deal with this question as courageously as we can as the
evil terribly wrecked unity, harmony and happiness.”51

The culmination of the feelings in the hearts of different stalwarts

of the Indian National Congress found expression in the Annual
Session of the Indian National Congress held at Calcutta in the
year 1917 when a pious resolution was passed that displayed
concern for the untouchables.
“This Congress urges upon the people of India the necessity, justice
and righteousness of removing all disabilities imposed by custom
upon the depressed classes, the disabilities being of most vexatious
and oppressive character subjecting those classes to considerable
hardship and inconvenience.”52

The mover and the supporters of the resolution advocated the

resolution with all vociferousness at their command. The mover
of the resolution Natesan said, “...this resolution specially asks
you to remove disabilities of a most vexatious and oppressive
character.” Bhulabhai Desai supporting the resolution said, “The
disabilities under which some of our brethren suffer are a great
20
blow to the equality and brotherhood of man that we preach ...
on the ground of necessity and on the ground of righteousness....
how can you deny them what the resolution demands....?”
According to Rama Iyer, another supporter, “This resolution calls
for social freedom by which we shall shatter the shackles that
bind the lower classes. They are at the foot of the nation and if
you and I would climb to the hill of Home Rule, we must first
shatter the shackles on our feet and then only Home Rule comes
to us... You cannot be political democrats and at the same time
social autocrats .... a social slave cannot be politically a
freeman.”53 Ambedkar, an outstanding leader of the struggle for
the amelioration of the conditions of the untouchables vis-a-vis
the depressed classes, found nothing laudable in the passing of
the resolution. To him the resolution was no other than ‘a strange
event’ for a variety of reasons. Firstly, the resolution remained
suspect inasmuch as the President of the Indian National Congress
Mrs. Annie Besant was, so thought Ambedkar, no friend of
untouchables. “So far as I know,” he wrote, “she felt great
antipathy towards the untouchables.” In support of his comment
Ambedkar quoted Besant from one of her articles in the Indian
Review titled, ‘The Uplift of the Depressed Classes.’ It was her
belief that the children of the depressed classes needed lessons
on cleaning, what constituted ‘decency of behaviour’. She was
of the opinion that the bodies of such children were “ill-odorous
and foul with liquor” and that “it would need some generations
of the purer food and living to their bodies fit to sit in the close
neighbourhood of a social room.”54 Referring to an English parallel
she seemed to suggest separate schools for boys belonging to
separate classes : “In England, it has never been regarded as
desirable to educate boys and girls of all classes side by side.”

Such ideas entertained by no less a personality than the President

21 |2_\36
of the foremost political body in India, opined Dr. Ambedkar,
rendered the passing of the resolution moved by Natesan ‘a
strange event’. The second reason for which Ambedkar considered
it a strange event was that it was entirely opposed to the declared
policy of the Congress. In his book ‘What Congress and Gandhi
Have Done to the Untouchables’ he quoted extensively from the
addresses of the Presidents in the Annual Sessions of the Congress
to demonstrate that the Congress was not really interested in
confronting the question of the depressed classes head-on. To
him it appeared that the Congress was not at all inclined to include
social reforms in its aims and objects or in the agenda of serious
political discussion.

In 1886 Dadabhai Naoroji expressed the view at the second

session of the Indian National Congress that ‘a political body like
Congress’ with its preferred goal ‘to represent to our rulers our
political aspirations should not discuss social reforms and other
class questions to class Congressmen. Almost a similar view was
expressed by Budrudin Tyabji, the third President of the Indian
National Congress,who considered it wise and expedient ‘to
confine our discussions to such questions as affect the whole of
India at large, and to abstain from the discussion of questions that
affect a particular part or a particular community only.’

The third occasion when the same issue was debated in 1892 when
W.C. Banerjee, addressing the gathering assembled at the third
session of the Indian National Congress, said, “.... I am one of
those who have very little faith in the public discussion of social
matters; those are things which, I think, ought to be left to the
individuals of a community who belong to the same social
organizations to do what they can for improvement.”
In 1895 the question of social reforms again figured on the agenda
of discussion of the Indian National Congress. Surendra Nath
Banerjee, presiding over the deleberations of the Annual Session,
said “....our is a political and social movement; and it cannot be
made a matter of complaint against us that we are not social
organization anymore than it can be urged against any of my
lawyer friends that they are not doctors.”55

Prior to 1895 there were two schools among Congressmen : one

school felt the need of social reform, but believed that the
‘Congress Session’was not the proper platform for it. For instance,
a Congress stalwart like Dadabhai Naoroji openly said in his
Presidential Address in 1886 that “this Congress is out to take up
questions of social reform... but it should be taken up by a class
of Congressmen authorized for the purpose.” The second school
denied that there was need for any social reform by the Congress.
It challenged the view that “there cannot be political reform
without social reform.”56 The Social Conference was, however,
an eye sore to the Congressmen who belonged to anti-Social
Reform section. This section was evidently getting restive at the
kindly disposition and the accommodating spirit which the
dominant section in the Congress was displaying to the Social
Conference, particularly in the matter of allowing jt to use the
Congress pandal for holding its sessions.57

In 1895, when the Congress met in Poona, the anti-Social Reform

section rebelled and threatened to burn the Congress pandal if
the Congress would allow it to be used by the Social Conference.
The pro-Social Reform Party in the Congress was not prepared
to fight the opponents and so the rebellious faction found a golden
opportunity to establish its view that the Congress should not
entertain the question of social reform.
23
In the backdrop of such events one hardly finds reason to disagree
with Ambedkar when he said that the resolution on the depressed
classes passed by the Congress in the year 1917 was not only in
complete disharmony with the state of affairs prevailing in the
Congress since its founding till date, it even contradicted the
officially declared policy. “Before the passing of the Resolution
in 1917, the Congress leaders belonging to both the Moderate
and the Extremist wings felt the need for social uplift of the
depressed classes, but they hardly did anything noteworthy to
officially put it in the resolution of the Annual Sessions of the
Congress.”58

The reason for the apathy to bring the issue in the political arena
lay in the fact that the extremists in the Congress believed that “If
it were possible for the bureaucracy to turn the social divisions of
the community into political divisions, there could hardly be any
other more effective fatal instrument of political disorganization.”
They seem to have theorized that an unnatural indigenous rule
like that of caste could not but find its safety in better political
organization; by implication, they seem to have hypothesized that
alien rule would feel secure in disorganization. They thought that
if it was within their might, the alien rulers of British India would
have destroyed all centres of political organization. They arrived
at the conclusion that caste with the proper safeguards is an
admirable means of social organization and conservation, but it
had not and should not be allowed to have any political
meaning.59

By and large there was a strong feeling among the Congress

leaders that the caste system was once productive of good, and
in fact had been a necessary phase of human progress through
24
which all the civilizations had to pass.60 Equally strong was their
belief that “.... our civilization has always been preponderingly
spiritual and moral, and caste division in India had a spiritual
and moral basis.”61 Hindu civilization being spiritual based its
institutions on spiritual and moral foundations and subordinated
the material elements and material considerations. Caste was
not only an institution which ought to be immune from the cheap
second-hand denunciations so long in fashion, but “a supreme
necessity without which Hindu civilization could not have
developed its distinctive character or worked out its unique
mission”.62 In fairness, however, it should be conceded that most
of the Congress leaders were of the opinion that the institution of
caste degenerated, it ceased to be determined by spiritual
qualifications which were once essential. Over centuries purely
material tests of occupation and birth became the determinant.
By the change it gradually set itself against the fundamental tenet
of Hinduism.

Sometime in the month of September, 1907 Bal Gangadhar Tilak,

the most important personality among the extremists, made a
definite pronouncement on the caste system. “The prevailing
ideas of social inequality”, he emphasized, “were working
immense evil.”63 The pronouncement from an earnest Hindu and
a sincere nationalist like Tilak was only to be expected in view of
the fact that all along his eventful political career he had opposed
social obscurantism. The ‘Bande Mataram’ justified Tilak’s view
in the following way:

“The baser ideas underlying the degenerate perversions of the

original caste, the mental attitude which bases them on a false
foundation of caste, pride and arrogance, of a divinely ordained
superiority depending on the accident of birth, of a fixed and
25
intolerable inequality, were inconsistent with the supreme
teaching, the basic spirit of Hinduism which sees the one
invariable and invisible dignity in every individual. Tilak believed
that in the ideal of nationalism which India would set before the
world, there would be an essential equality between man and
man, between class and class, all being different but equal and
united part of the ‘Virat Purusa’.”64

65The extremists were not opposed to the caste system as such,

that is, a system based on a scheme of social division of labour
and merit. But they were vociferous in condemning the distortion
of the caste system which resulted in the denial of the essential
spirit of equality in society. They felt that when they insisted on
reorganizing the nation politically into a democratic unity, they
could not but recognize that the same principle of reorganization
should inevitably assert itself socially. They believed that their
attempts would be fruitless if the principle realized in politics was
not asserted socially. 66

Tilak, who was very much vocal about the evil of casteism could
not, however, go out of The clutches of his aides and satellites.’
When Vital Ramji Shinde organized at Bombay a conference in
1917 for the removal of untouchability under the Presidentship
of Maharaja Sayajirao Gaekwar of Baroda, Tilak agreed to attend
the conference on the persistent request of Shinde, but he did
not forget to remind Shinde that he was doing that in his individual
capacity as Tilak, and not as the editor of The Kesari’. 67

In the conference Tilak moved a resolution that the Congress

should enlist the support of the untouchables by agreeing to take
the representatives of the community. In a forceful speech Tilak
made a strong plea for the removal of untouchability. He admitted
26
that it was the tyranny of the brahmins of the ancient times that
started the evil system, but it was high time for its eradication.
He said that in the past there were no divisions between the
brahmins and other castes; even the Peshwas accepted water out
of leather water carriers carried by untouchables. He even went
to the length of saying, “If a God were to tolerate untouchability
I would not recognize him as God at all.” 68

Afterwards, Shinde brought out a memorandum for the removal

of untouchability and collected signatures of members of all castes
and communities. He is reported to have said that he went to get
Tilak’s signature. Tilak was in Sardar Griha surrounded by his
satellites, but he was found hesitating'to put his signature. He
appeared to be ready at one time to sign, but Dada Saheb
Karandikar came in the way. Then Lokmanya ‘demurred and at
last declined to sign.’ 69

Shinde said that he had had occasions to test the Lokmanya’s

alleged partiality to political reform and his indifference to social
reform. When Shinde asked him whether he should give up his
work among the depressed classes and devote himself exclusively
to politics, Tilak said, “No”, and in their free and frank talk
afterwards, says Shinde, he was convinced that Tilak, though
mingled himself with politics, was wholly on the side of the
Depressed Classes Mission.70

In the issue of ‘The Kesari’ published on September 18, 1917

Tilak tried to analyse the causes of dissensions between the
brahmins and non-brahmins. He pointed out that it was
inconceivable that the leaders of the non-brahmins being
themselves educated should subscribe to the present despotic rule.
He said that the non-brahmins were showing their self-confidence
27
in their struggle against what appeared to them to be social
injustice. The same feeling must be shown in political fields also.
At Lucknow, Tilak said that he would not mind if in the Councils
a non-brahmin would be elected, because he wanted a majority
of Indians there instead of the foreigners. The brahmins never
said, Tilak reported, that they wanted all the seats in the Council.71
The fact that they got more seats in the Legislative Councils of
the Provinces than what were due to them according to their
population was because of their advance in the field of education.
Tilak argued that the true distinction was not between the
brahmins and the non-brahmins, but between the educated and
the non-educated. It was the educated of any caste who could
not but secure higher privileges.72

The remarks of Tilak were interesting in a number of ways. First,

he endeavoured to evaluate the new forces in a realistic manner.
His analysis was from the standpoint of political, expediency and
not from that of a sociologist. Second, as a practical politician
Tilak could see that the resurgent and the awakened backward
classes could not be ignored as a force to reckon with. He
welcomed the spirit of self-confidence that had dawned over them,
and as a political leader he sought to awaken it also in the political
sphere. Third, he rightly emphasized that it was primarily a
question of education and acccordingly expressed his readiness
to give assurance that the advanced classes would do their best to
help their less fortunate brethren.73 Tilak also wrote an article on
the brahmins and non-brahmins and pointed out that there was
no truth in saying that the brahmins only had exploited and ruined
the non-brahmins. The vaishyas and kshatriyas had also done it.
He had also to fall back on the Buddhist text in support of his
argument that the castes were determined not by birth but by
action. He believed that if caste distinctions could not be
28
abolished, at least caste hatred must be rooted out. His plea was
: “all irrespective of caste must come together and strive for the
scheme of national welfare as embodied in the Indian National
Congress.”74

The Congress, while anxious to get support of the depressed

classes to the Congress-League Scheme,75 knew very well that it
had no chance of getting that. The reason was not far to seek, the
antipathy of the depressed classes to the Congress had continued
ever since the birth of the Congress. As a result of the influence
exerted by, and out of respect for, Sir Narayan Chandravarkar,
an ex-President of the Congress and the President of the Depressed
Classes Mission, a section of the depressed classes agreed to give
support to the Congress-League Scheme. It agreed to give support
on condition that the Congress would have to pass a resolution
for the removal of social disabilities of the untouchables. The
Congress resolution of 1917 was in fulfilment of its obligation
imposed by contract with the depressed classes, negotiated through
the mediation of Narayan Chandravarkar.76

The depressed classes resolution called upon the “higher castes,

who claim political rights, to take steps for the purpose of removing
the blot of degradation from the depressed classes, which has
subjected those to the worst treatment in their country.”77

B.R.Ambedkar, the outstanding leader of the downtrodden classes

in pre-independent India, found no magnanimity on the part of
the Congress. In return for the support it got, the Congress was
bound to organize a drive against untouchability for honouring
the sentiments expressed in the said resolution. The Congress,
and the Depressed Classes Mission, B.R.Ambedkar so maintained,
“did nothing. The passing of the resolution was a heartless
transaction. It was a formal fulfilment of a condition which the
depressed classes had made for lending their support to the
Congress-League Scheme. The Congressmen did not appear to
be charged with any qualms of conscience or with any sense of
righteous indignation against man’s inhumanity to man. They
forgot the resolution the very day it was passed. The resolution
was a dead letter. Nothing came out of it.”78

Mr. Santhanam was quick enough to raise objections to the attacks

made by Ambedkar and sought to refute his charges. He claimed
that Ambedkar had omitted the vital period when Congress
ministers were not in office. “Till 1937 the Congress was not in
power and its main activity was propaganda. It could not do much
for or against the scheduled castes in the way of legislative or
administrative action.79 With the advent of Gandhi in Indian politics
there took place a complete overhauling of the Congress. The
old Coi .gress used to pass resolutions and left them at that, hoping
that British Government would take action on them. The old
Congress was purely a gathering of intellectuals. It did not feel
the need of going to the masses to secure their active participation
in the political movement, perhaps because it did not realize the
value of mass action. The old Congress had no machinery and
no funds to carry on mass agitation.”80

Under the leadership of Gandhi almost everything changed. By

1922, the Congress was completely transformed. It became a
mass organization, membership was open to all and sundry. It
forged sanctions behind its resolutions by adopting the novel
policies of non-cooperation and civil disobedience. It put out
what was called a constructive programme of social amelioration.81

In 1920, the Congress plank was removal of untouchability

30
through intense propaganda among the caste Hindus. Mr.
Santhanam reported, “During the three stormy years 1920-23,
rural India which had continued in its somnolent medieval
existence awoke to the puzzling spectacle of youths belonging to
the highest castes thundering to shock audiences on the crime of
treating fellowmen. and women as untouchables. These youths
went to the hamlets of the untouchables and defied the elders to
boycott or punish them.”82

To finance the different activities like non-cooperation, civil

disobedience movement including the social amelioration
programme the Congress started a fund of one crore of rupees.
It was called the ‘Tilak Swaraj Fund’. The constructive programme
of social amelioration was an important landmark signifying a
vast attitudinal change in the working of the Congress as a body
for political action. The draft programme was framed by the
Congress Working Committee at its Bardoli meeting in the month
of February, 1922. Among the advices given by the Working
Committee to all Congress organizations that one which dealt with
depressed classes was :

“To organize the depressed classes for a better life, to improve

their social, mental and moral condition to induce them to send
their children to national schools and provide them the ordinary
facilities which the other citizens enjoy.”83

The programme was confirmed by the All-India Congress

Committee for action. At Lucknow in June, 1922 the Working
Committee took the following resolution regarding the scheduled
castes:

31
“This Committee hereby appoints a Committee consisting of
Swami ShmcOaanand, Mrs. Sarojini Naidu and Messrs. G.B.
Despande and I.K. Yajnik to formulate a scheme embodying
political measures to be adopted for bettering the condition of
the so-called ‘untouchables’ throughout the country, and place it
for consideration before the next meeting of the Working
Committee. The amount to be raised for the scheme is to be
Rs.2 lacs for the present.”84

The resolution of the Working Committee was placed for

acceptance at the meeting of the All India Congress Committee in
June, 1922. The Committee accepted the appointment of the
members forwarded by the Working Committee with the only
amendment - “The amount to be raised for the scheme should
be 5 lacs for the present.” 85 The only work that the Committee
could do after its formation was to send a letter of request to the
Working Committee for an advance for drawing up a scheme for
depressed classes work. The letter of Swami Shradhanand for
the same was read in the meeting of the Working Committee which
resolved it to refer it to the sub-committee for the purpose.86 It
further resolved to appoint Gangadhar Rao B. Despande to draw
up the scheme. But before the Committee could do any substantial
work Swami Shradhanand submitted his resignation. The year
1922 did not produce any other work worth mentioning for the
untouchables excepting the formation of the Committee.87

In May, 1923 the All India Congress Committee met at Nagpur

and resolved that : “The question of the condition of the
untouchables be referred to the Working Committee for necessary
action.”88

Ambedkar with a tinge of satire commented on the Congress’

32
resolution-making episode in the following way :
“Here ends the second stage in the history of the resolution
remitting the question of untouchables to a special committee.89
The third stage was marked by the resolution of the Working
Committee passed in May, 1923. It was resolved that while some
improvement has been effected in the treatment of the so-called
untouchables in response to the policy of the Congress this
Committee is conscious that much work remained yet to be done
in this respect and inasmuch as this question of untouchability
concerns the Hindu community particularly it requests the All India
Hindu Mahasabha also to take up this matter and to make
strenuous efforts to remove this evil from amidst the Hindu
community.”90

Ambedkar as the leader of the depressed classes exclaimed in

disappointment, “What shameful close to a flaring start! Congress
washed its hands off the problem of the untouchables.” He
thought that there could not be a body more unsuited to take up
the work of the uplift of the untouchables than the Hindu
Mahasabha. As a militant organization its aims and objects were
to conserve in everyway, everything that was Hindu in the field
of religion and culture. It was not a social reform organization,
its main aim was to combat the influence of the Muslims in Indian
political strength and it was hardly interested in doing anything
to do away with the system of caste or untouchability.”

The Hindu Mahasabha understandably did not come forth to

undertake the work, for it had no urge for it and also because the
Congress had merely passed a pious resolution recommending
the work to them without making any promise of financial
provision. So the project came to an inglorious and ignominious
end. 91
33
Dr. Ambedkar in his book ‘What Congress and Gandhi have done
to the Untouchables’ made an analytical review of the reason for
abandoning the social amelioration of the untouchables by the
Congress. He believed that the Congress was afraid that a huge sum of
money would be eaten up from the Congress Fund to achieve its
preferred objective. The Congress thought it would be better to
handover the work to the Hindu Mahasabha, because Swami
Shradhanand, the greatest and the most sincere champion of the
untouchables, would be most likely to produce a very big scheme and
in all probability would make a big demand on the Congress Fund.92

Ambedkar was not at all convinced that the Congress was all out for
the abolition of untouchability. He opined that the approval of the
note of the Working Committee by the All India Congress Committee
was a clear proof of the attitude. The note referred to by Ambedkar
stated, “..., where the prejudice against the untouchables is still strong
separate schools and separate wells must be made to draw such children
to national schools and to persuade the people to allow the untouchables
to use the common wells.” Even such a timid and mild programme
was not implemented by the Congress.93

Ambedkar was not ready to believe that Congress had to abandon the
scheme for paucity of funds. He observed: “The Congress had started
the Tilak Swaraj Fund in 1932 and collected a huge sum of money to
finance the different constructive programmes taken up by the Working
Committee at Bardoli.” He felt the Congress to be insincere in its attitude
to the development of the depressed classes because the Congress voted
only Rs.43,381.00 out of Rupees 49 V2 lacs reserved for giving effect to
the Bardoli programme,94 in which the uplift of the untouchables was
given so much prominence especially when the figure of untouchables
touched some sixty millions. He was so annoyed that he even went to
34
the length of saying, “it would not be wrong to say that the Bardoli
resolution was a fraud in so far as it related to the untouchables.” He
did not hesitate to question the sincerity of Gandhi so far as the
untouchables were concerned. He quoted Gandhi from Young India
(November, 1921) “I consider the removal of untouchability as a most
powerful factor in the process of attainment of swaraj.” Accordingly,
Gandhi had been exhorting the untouchables not to join hands with
the British against swaraj, but to make common cause with the Hindus
and help to win swaraj.To him it appeared that Gandhi did not take
the slightest interest in the amelioration programme. If he had taken
the slightest interest he could have saved a large part of the Tilak Swaraj
Fund and reserved it for the benefit of the untouchables.95

On different occasions of the Congress sessions the untouchables figured

in the speeches of the Congress stalwarts. In the 38th session of the
Indian National Congress at Cocanda, (December 28, 1923 - January
1,1924) Kona Venkatappayya, Chairman of the Reception Committee
in his welcome address, expressed the view that “The problem of
untouchability also requires special attention.... It is not easy to make
any advance in this direction unless the country realizes the injustice of
treatment now accorded to our ‘Panchama’ brethren.” He even added
that “Non-cooperation is also a spiritual movement and the unjust and
unequal treatment of our fellow countrymen prove the hollowness of
our professions as Non-cooperators.”96

Again in December, 1924 in the 39th session at Belgaum (December

26-27) G.R. Balkrishna Deshpande, the Chairman of the Reception
Committee, admitted in his speech that “The sense of untouchability is
unfortunately still lingering” and he emphasized that “much remains to
be done in the matter of their (untouchables) education and social
amelioration.” Gandhi in his Presidential Address remarked that
“untouchability is another hindrance to swaraj. Its removal is just as
35
essential for Swaraj as the attainment of Hindu-Muslim unity. It is
essentially a Hindu question and Hindus cannot claim to take swaraj till
they have restored the liberty of the suppressed classes.” He even
added a cautionary note: “I would, however, warn the Hindu brethren
against the tendency which one sees now-a-days of exploiting the
suppressed classes for political end.”97

In his Presidential Address Srinivasa Iyenger sympathized with the

pitiable condition of the untouchables and observed, “The removal of
untouchability was long confined to the platform of social or religious
reform and did not take rapid progress.” It is astonishing that though
he said that under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi almost in the
twinkling of an eye the attitude towards untouchables was materially
changed, he was not ready to accept the view of Gandhi that
untouchability is a hindrance to swaraj. He opined, “Neither foreign
nor domestic critics are right when they assert that untouchability is a
formidable obstacle to swaraj.” But “We cannot”, he said, “await for
swaraj till it (untouchability) is abolished.... ” However, he did not fail
to declare, “ we must make an end of untouchability.... ”98

Almost in all the Congress Sessions the Congress stalwarts in their

speeches expressed their concern for the untouchables but unfortunately
the resolutions they adopted turned into mere paper promises and
nothing substantial came out of that.

On November 12,1930, King George V formally inaugurated the Round

Table Conference.99 Ambedkar thought that from the point of view of
the Indians the Round Table Conference was an event of significance.
To the untouchables it was a landmark in their history. The untouchables
were for the first time allowed to be represented separately. Ambedkar
and Dewan Bahadur R. Srinivasan were selected as the delegates to
represent the untouchables. It meant that the untouchables were not
36
merely regarded separate from the Hindus but also of such importance
as to have the right to be consulted in framing a Constitution for India.
The work of the Conference was distributed among nine committees,
one of the committees was called the Minorities Committee to which
was assigned the most difficult task of finding a solution to the communal
question.100 Mr. Santhanam did not think the selection of representatives
to be noteworthy at all. The Congress had refused to attend the
Conference for it was then in civil disobedience against the British Raj,
the ‘Salt Satyagraha’ 101was in full swing. Thousands of Congress
workers were in jail. The members of the Round Table Conference
were chosen for their hostility to the Congress. He felt that, another
object in making the nominations was to magnify the differences in
Indian social structure as a justification for British domination. The first
session of the Round Table Conference was without a Congress
representative.

The eighth para of the report of the Minorities Committee contained:

“The discussion made it evident that the demand which remained as
the only one which would be generally acceptable was separate
electorates.”102 The general objection centred round this declaration.
Gandhi felt that all his efforts to abolish untouchability and merge the
scheduled castes into the general body of the Hindu society would be
nullified if untouchability was converted into a political vested interest.
Gandhi was very much against separate electorates for the depressed
classes. He believed untouchability to be predominantly moral and
religious. To him ‘separate electorate’ was harmful for the depressed
classes and for the Hindus. He opined: “*£=•• So far as Hinduism is
concerned separate electorate would vivisect and disrupt it.”104 The
Congress session at Karachi was held in March, 1931 and adopted a
resolution on Fundamental Rights which were considered to be of much
importance to the scheduled castes. The extract of the Resolution (XV)
taken at the aforesaid session runs thus - “In order to end the exploitation
37
of the masses, political freedom must include real economic freedom
of the starving millions.”105 The items of the Resolution106 that were of
real importance to the scheduled caste people are quoted below:

(No.VI)... no disability to be attached to any citizen by reason of his or

her religion, caste or creed or sex in regard to public employment, office
of power, etc.

(No. VII) equal rights to all citizens in regard to public roads, wells,
schools and other places of public resort.

(X) The franchise shall be on the basis of universal adult suffrage.

Mr. Santhanam observed that excepting separate electorate the

Congress was ready to concede to all the demands made by the
scheduled castes.107

The second session of the Round Table Conference (Autumn of 1931)

was attended by Gandhi as the sole representative of the Congress.108
Gandhi said in the Conference when the minorities’ claim was
presented, “I shall resist with my life the grant of separate electorates to
the depressed classes’’109

Gandhi’s attitude to the demands of the untouchables in the Round

Table Conference could not be understood, so thought Ambedkar, even
by his friends. To give recognition to the Muslims and to the Sikhs and
to refuse it to the untouchables came to the Hindu downtrodden classes
as a surprise and puzzle.

Ambedkar had the impression that Gandhi could not remain satisfied
with merely expressing his views, he resorted to political manoeuvring.
When he heard that the Minorities representing in the Round Table
38
Conference were about to produce a settlement which would offer the
untouchables the opportunity of getting support of other minorities
and particularly of the Muslims he planned to buy out the Musalmans
by giving them their fourteen demands which in the beginning he did
not agree to. This Gandhi did on condition that the Musalmans would
withdraw their support for Hindu minority demands.

No wonder, Mr. Santhanam raised objection to the comments made

by Ambedkar that Gandhi wanted to appease the Musalmans at the
expense of the untouchables. He observed, “The Muslim draft did not
contain any proposals about other minorities. So far as the Muslim
representatives were concerned they were willing to settle with Gandhi
without bothering about the untouchables or other communities. But
the negotiations broke down on the demand for a majority of one in
the Punjab and Bengal. After this failure the Muslim delegates conspired
and produced a Minorities Pact at the last sitting on November 13,
1931.112

Gandhi’s appeal found no response from the British Government and

the result was Ramsay MacDonald’s Communal Award.113 It gave
separate electorate to the scheduled castes which Gandhi wanted to
resist with his life. Gandhi’s view was that adult franchise combined
with a powerful moral and social drive against untouchability could be
the true means of liberation114 Gandhi proposed his fast and declared,
“My fast is only against separate electorate and not against statutory
reservation of seats;” He even went to the length of saying, “I have
asked my son to say in my name at Bombay Conference, that he, as
his father’s son, was prepared to forfeit his father’s life rather than see
any injury being done to the suppressed classes in mad haste.115

Gandhi began his fast on September 13,1932 against the Communal

39
Award. The whole country was startled. The British Government
declared that without consent of the leaders of the scheduled castes
they would not change it, At long last by the Yeravada Pact116 agreement
was reached between the leaders of the depressed classes. They got
85% of the demand. Thus the Communal Award was partially modified
by the Poona Pact,117 Ambedkar himself said, “I am happy to be able
to say that it has become possible through the co-operation of all of us
to find a solution so as to save the life of Mahatma and consistent with
such problem as it is necessary for the interest of the depressed classes
in future.”118

The Montagu-Chelmsford Report119 which preceded the Constitution

of 1919 had stated that there must be provision in the Constitution for
the protection of the depressed classes. Gandhi was of the opinion that
the Congress was fully pledged to redress the wrongs done to the
untouchables and argued that any attempt “to give political safeguards
to the untouchables is unnecessary and harmful.” But many of his
disciples as members of the Constituent Assembly were found vociferous
in demanding constitutional safeguards for the depressed classes. And
so Nehru had to accept and kept in the Resolution safeguards120 for the
minorities, backward and tribal areas and depressed and backward
classes. The provisions would give equal opportunity to all communities
irrespective of their races and religions. Ambedkar criticized the
Congress and Gandhi for their attitude towards the depressed classes
which he thought to be far from friendly.

On the other hand, the supporters of Gandhi and Congress were no

few in number. Ambedkar’s criticism was challenged. He was criticized
to be subjective. It was argued that it would have been more logical if
Gandhi would have pursued a slow but a steady approach for removing
the caste distinctions. He endeavoured to awaken the conscience of
the upper caste Hindus against the infamy of ages. The Indian National
40
Congress passed several resolutions drawing urgent attention to the
problems of the depressed classes, but they were hardly accompanied
by concerted energetic action. Mr. Ambedkar’s critique of Gandhi may
appear uncharitable, but never devoid of passion for the downtrodden
classes of Hindus in British India.

41
 Notes and references : Chapter One

1. Wadia, A.R : Working Paper p. 1

2. Varnashrama Dharma: The traditional hierarchy of the four varnas, ‘colours’ or estates
(in the sense the word had in French, Ancien Regime) whereby four categories are
distinguished, the highest is that of the brahmans or priests, below them the kshatriyas
or warriors;, then the vaishyas in modern usage merely merchants and finally the shudras,
the servants or have-nots. Itmust be noted that the brahman is the priest, the kshatriya
the member of the class of kings, the vaishya the farmer, the shudra the unfree servant.
In particular, this is the only conceptual scheme which is made use of by the classical
texts of Hinduism in order to characterize persons and their functions in society.
Homo Hierarchicus - Louis Dumont, pp. 66-67

3. Vedas : Sacred hymn or verse composed in archaic Sanskrit No definite date can be
ascribed to the composition of the vedas, but a period of 1500-2000 B.C. is acceptable
to scholars. According to Wilson the actual condition of the Hindus, both political and
religious to be traced here in Vedas, the earliest known record of social organization.
There.are four Vedas: Rg/Rig, Yajur, Sama and Atharva.
: The New Encyclopaedia Britannica vol.2,15th edition, University of Chicago,
pp. 289 - 290
: Radhakrishnan, S. : Indian Philosophy vol. 1, p. 63

4. Apastamba Sutra: Code of Manu that deals with the castes of lower origin.

5. Varnas: is a classical Sanskrit word generally means a colour and so it has been argued
that the four-varna system was based on the distinction of skin colour between Aryans
and pre-Aryan residents of India. Varna undoubtedly means colour in later literature,
but is not used in that sense in the Vedas at all. The word varna means in early sacred
literature and in grammatical works a class. Varna when used for describing human
society also means class in a particular order.
I, Karve : Hindu Society, p. 51

6. Brahmans/Brahmins : In the Aryan society the brahmans were the first of the
Varnashrama. They used to remain busy only with the study of religious scriptures and
religious rituals. They are not a priest- hood pledged to supportplxed doctrines but an

intellectual aristocracy charged with the moulding of the higher life of people.
Radhakrishnan, S.: Indian Philosophy, vol-I, p. Ill

42
7. ibid., p. 111. Kshatriyas : The second in order were the kshatriyas. The kings who became
the patrons of the learned brahmans were the kshatriyas or princes who had borne to
rule in those days. The word kshatriyas comes from Ksatra, ‘rule, dominion’. It has
the same meaning in the Veda, the Avesta and the Persion inscriptions.

8. Vaishyas: The rest (third in order) were classed as the people or the vaisyas. The tapas
of the vaishyas was trade and agriculture,
ibid., p. Ill

9/10 Shudras : Appear in the late hymn of the Rg-Veda and seemed to correspond to
aborigines, (like the ‘dasa’ and ‘dasyu’).
Dumont, L.: Homo Hierarachicus p. 68
Biswas, O.: From Justice to Welfare p. 9
11. Manu - ‘Man’, one of the 14 successive mystical progenitors and sovereign of the earth
who fathers and supports the human race through the antaras (long periods of time, cf.
manuvantara). According to tradition, one of these authored and celebrated law
code (Manu Samhita or smriti), dating from post-Vedic times and including civil as well
as religious injunctions.
12. Manu Smriti (900 B.C./ 500B.C./ A.D. 1200) - Hindu code of law and jurisprudence
known as Manava Dharma Sastra or as Manu Smriti; Manu’s Code : Manu merely
putative author as Manu was name or title given to semi-divine persons; nothing else in
known about manu, his name being affixed to it to increase its authority; is only the
putative author; held by some to be a metrical collection of Sanskrit (based on earlier
prose manual) of ethical, religious, civil, criminal and ceremonial rules of guidance for
right conduct as expounded by a certain school of north-western brahmanas called
Manavas; its date has been fixed variously at 900 B.C. 500 B.C. and A.D 1200; not .
included in Sutra but in Smriti (traditional writings) so has no religious sanction as such;
had many interpolations, accretions, additions and modifications from time to time
and was brought to its present form (12 books containing 2,685 verses) about 200
B.C.; relates to laws and customs of those following some form of Hinduism and is a
compilation of laws of different ages, races and conditions of society; deals with many
subjects but with regard to law; treats of duties and customs to be observed by persons
in 4 traditional stages of Hindu life. The Smriti gave sanction to the institution of caste
and gave brahmans unchallenged authority, relegating shudras as outcastes to the lowest
and most degraged place in society; many rules and customs laid down were arbitrary

43
 and rigorous; in spite of its harshness or because of it, Hindu social system has continued
to survive as an integrated force.
Chopra, RN. and Prabha Chopra : Encyclopaedia of India vol. 1 p.239
Delhi: Agam Prakashan 1998
D.L Homo Hierarchicus p. 67

13. Biswas, O.: From Justice to Welfare p. 9

14. Chakladar, S. : Bharater Jatbabastya O’ Rajniti’(Bengali), p. 28

15. Karve, I. : Hindu Society - An Interpretation 3rd ed. p.54

16. Biswas, 0. : From Justice to Welfare, p. 10

17. Chakladar, S. : Bharater Jatbabastya O’ Rajniti (Bengali) p. 41

18. Sherring, M.A : Hindu Tribes and Castes, p. 16

19. Aryans : The generally accepted view is that the Aryans came to this country (India)
either from Central Asia or from some European countries.

20. Chakladar, S. : ‘Bharater Jatbabastya O’ Rajniti’, p. 41

21. Wadia, A.R. : Working Paper p. 2

22. Beteille’, A. : Castes: Old & New p. 90

23. Purusha Sukta: has the first reference to the division of Hindu Society into the four
classes namely, brahmins, ksatriyas, vaisyas and sudras in the Purusha-Sukta of the
Veda where the four orders are described as having sprung from the body of the creative
Diety, from his head, arms, thighs and feet. To us this is merely a poetical image and its
sense is that the brahmans were the men of knowledge, the kshatriyas the men of
power, the vaisyas the producers and support of society, the shudras its servants.
Purani, A. : Sri Aurobindo’s Vedic Glossary p. 19

Radhakrishnan, S : Indian Philosophy ^ vol. lj>p.111-112

44
24. Rig Veda: The oldest of the Vedas. The inspired songs which the Aryans brought with
them from their earliest home into India as their most precious possession. The sudras
appear in the latest hymn of the Rig Veda and seemed to correspond to aborigines (like
the dasa and dasyu) integrated into the society on pain and servitude.
Radhakrishnan, S. : Indian Philosophy vol. I p. 63
L. Dumont: Homo Hierarchicus, The Caste System and its Implications p.67

25. Max Muller : A History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature

26. Colebrooke : Miscellaneous Essays

27. Dasyus : Please see Rg. Veda 24

28. Chakladar, S. :‘Bharater Jatbabastya O’Rajniti’ p. 11

29. Dumont, L. : Homo Hierarchicus, The Caste System and its Implications p. 2

30. Please see 29

31. Yadavs: Origin is to be traced from Yadu-dynasty. They are vaishyas who domesticated
and carried on trade with cows.

32. bhumiar brahmins : Are brahmins by caste but also owners of land. They are to be
found only in Bihar and the eastern part of U.P

33. Godelier’s : Prof. Sobhanlal Mukherjee’s paper entitled “Casteism and Contemporary
Indian Politics”, Paper presented at the seminar (July 3 - 4, 19$8) organized by the
Department of Political Science, Calcutta University.

34. Biswas, 0 : From Justice to Welfare R 13

35. Betielle’, A : Caste: Old and New, p. 87

36. Simon Commission: The British Government appointed the Commission in November
1927 under the joint Chairmanship of the distinguished Leberal lawyer Sir John Simon
and Clement Attlee, the future Prime Minister. The other seven members consisted
four conservatives, two labourities and one liberal. The British Government virtually
recognized the failure of Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms by appointing Simon
Commission. The Commission met with a strong criticism in India because Indians

45
 were excluded, Indian National Congress boycotted it. It published a two volume report
in 1930. The report proposed provincial autonomy in India but rejected Parliamentary
responsibility at Centre.
: The New Encyclopaedia Britannica vol. X, 15ed, 1986
: History of India - N.K. Sinha and A.C. Baneijee 1944 pp. 660-661
:’Bharater Etihas’ - A.C. Roy 1991, p. 470

37. Government of India Act (1935): On the basis of the discussion in the Round Table
Conference the British Government prepared a White Paper (1933) which later on
formed the nucleus of the Government of India Act, 1935. It provided for the
establishment of an Indian Federation made up of British Indian provinces and
Indian states.

38. Government of India : The Constitution of India, p. 204

Art. 366(24) : “Scheduled Castes” means such castes, races or tribes or parts of or
groups within such castes, races or tribes as are deemed under article 341 to be scheduled
castes for the purposes of this Constitution.

39. Art. 341 : The President (may with respect to any state or union territory), and where
it is a state, after consultation with the Governor thereof by public notification, specify
the castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within races or tribes which shall be for
the purposes of this Constitution be deemed as scheduled castes in relation to the state
[or union territory as the case may be].
The Constitution of India, Government of India , p. 178
Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs (modified upto' 15th August 1983).

40. Ghosh, S.K. : Protection of Minorities and Scheduled Castes, p. 2

41. Betielle’, A. : Castes: Old and New, p. 109

42. Chaturvarma Scheme : Please see Varnashrama Dharma 2

43. Betielle, A. : Castes: Old and New, p. 95

44. Ghosh, S.K. : Protection of Minorities and Scheduled Castes, p. 2

45. Beteille’A. : Castes: Old and new, p. 120

46
46. The Constitution of India: Government of India, Ministry of Law, Justice and Company
Affairs (modified upto 15th August 1983), p. 8

47. Beteille’, A : The Backward Classes and the New Social Order, p. 8

48. Ghosh, S.K: Protection of Minorities & New Social Order, jp 2

49. Ambedkar, B.R. : The Untouchables, Preface 1

50. Joshi, B.R. : Democracy in search of Equality;

Untouchables Politics and Indian Social Change, p. 1

51. The Congress, Conference and Conventions 0909) 143-145

52. Zaidi, A.M & S.G. Zaidi: The Encyclopaedia of the IndianNational Congress vol. VIII,
p. 588

53. Ambedkar B.R.: What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables,
p. 1-2

54. ibid., pp. 2,35

55. ibid., p. 79

56. ibid., pp. 12-13

57. ibid., p. 13

58. ibid., p. 14

59. Sri Aurobindo : 1 Bande Mataram’, p.632

60. ibid., vol. 1, p. 534

61. Sri Aurobindo : ‘Bande’Mataram’, p. 536

62. ibid., p. 537

47
63. Pradhan, G.A.K. Bhagwat: Lokmanya Tilak, a Biography, p. 462

64. Virat Purusa: Purusa is all this world, what has been and shall be. The whole world
even according to it is due to the self-diremption of the Absolute into the subject and
object, Purusa and Prakiti. The supreme reality becomes the active Purush it is said:
“From the Purusa Virat was born, and from Virat again Purusa.” Purusa is thus the
begetter as well as the begotten. He is the Absolute as well as the self-conscious I
S. Radkakrishnan: Indian Philosophy vol. 1, p. 41

65. The extremists: The high-handedness of the government to suppress the agitation,
against the partition of Bengal gave birth to the ‘extremists’ within the Congress.Leaders
of this wing were Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal, Aurobindo Ghosh, Lala Lajpat Rai and
others. The programmes of the extremists were ‘boycott’, ‘swadeshi’ and ‘national-
education’, The extremists decided to ‘boycott’ all sorts of British goods, even
government-service and titles.
Dr. Chaudhuri K. : ‘Natun Swadesh Katha’, (Bengali) p.363

66. Sri Aurobindo : ‘Bande’ Mataram’, p.533

67. Pradhan, G.A.K. Bhagwat: Lokmanya Tilak a Biography, p. 306

68. ibid., p. 306

69. Pradhan, G.A.K. Bhagwat: Lokmanya Tilak a Biography, p. 205

70. ibid., p. 291

71. ibid., p. 292

72. ibid., p. 293

73. ibid., p. 294

74. ibid., p. 340

75. Ambedkar, B.R. : What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables,
p. 17

48
76. ibid., p. 18

77. ibid., p. 18

78. ibid., p. 18

79. Santanam, K. : Ambedkar’s Attack, p. 4

80. Ambedkar, B.R. : What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables,
p. 19

81. ibid., p. 19

82. Santanam, K. : Ambedkar’s Attack, p. 23

83. Zaidi, A.M & S.G. Zaidi: The Encyclopaedia of the Indian National Congress
vol. VIII, p. 492

84. ibid., p. 471

85. ibid., p. 519

86. ibid:, p. 519

87. Ambedkar, B.R. : What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables,
p. 21

88. Zaidi, A.M & S.G. Zaidi - The Encyclopaedia of the Indian National Congress
vol. VIII, p. 34

89. Ambedkar, B.R.: What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables,
p. 22

90. Zaidi, A.M & S.G. Zaidi - The Encyclopaedia of the Indian National Congress
vol. VIII, p. 588

91. Ambedkar, B.R. : What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables,
p. 23

49
92. ibid., p. 23

93. Ambedkar, B.R. : What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables,
p. 23

94. Bardoli Programme : launched in February 1922 by Congress in which a reference

was made to the depressed classes. It intended “to organize the Depressed Classes for
a better life, to improve their social, mental and moral conditions.”
Zaidi, A.M & S.G. Zaidi - The Encyclopaedia of the Indian National Congress
vol. VIII, p. 334

95. Ambedkar, B.R. : What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables,
p. 23

96. Zaidi, A.M & S.G, Zaidi - The Encyclopaedia of the Indian National Congress
vol. VIII, p. 180
97. ibid., p. 541

98. ibid., vol. IX, p. 125

99. Round Table Conference : The Simon Commission suggested that the constitutional
problem of India should be discussed at a Round Table Conference. As per the
suggestion the first session of the Round Table Conference met in London in November,
1930. Congress instead of joining it launched a Civil Disobedience movement under
the leadership of Gandhi. The Conference was attended by other communities and
princely states but without the largest political party it proved to be a failure. The
Second Round Table Conference (September. 1931) had two important issues to discuss
- formation of federation in future independent India and protection of rights of
minorities. Congress joined under the leadership of Gandhi. The problem of minorities
could not be solved owing to disagreement between different leaders.

N.K. Sinha & A.C. Baneijee : History of India, p. 662

100. Ambedkar, B.R. : What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables,
p. 40

50
101. Salt Satyagraha : Gandhi selected ‘salt’ being the one used by all as the item for his
Civil Disobedience Movement on March 12,1930 Gandhi left for Dandi from Sabarmati
with 78 trusted followers. On April 5, 1930, after covering 380 kilometres, he reached
at Dandi in Gujrat. Next day (6th April) he resorted to making of salt from sea water,
which was illegal. The programme was carried on in other parts of the country where
there was scope for making salt. Gandhi was arrested while on his way to Dharasam.
Dr. Chaudhuri K. : Nutun Swadesh Katha (Bengali), p. 405

102. Ambedkar, B.R.: What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables,
p. 40

103. Santanam, K. : Ambedkar’s Attack, pp. 25-28

104. Indian National Congress : Congress and the protection of the minorities :
A collection of resolution adopted by the Congress Working Committee and the AICC
since 1885, p. 156

105. Santanam, K. : Ambedkar’s Attack, p. 23

106. Congress Session, 1931 Karachi Resolution No. XV. Meaning of Swaraj and
Fundamental Rights; Allahabad Law Journal 1947, p.119

107. Santanam, K. : Ambedkar’s Attack, p. 33

108. Sinha, N. K & A.K. Baneijee : History of India p. 662

109. Indian National Congress : A collection, 1930-34, p. 156

110. Ambedkar, B.R. : What Congress and Gandhi havedone to the Untouchables,
p. 172

111. ibid., p.172

112. Santanam, K. : Ambedar’s Attack, pp. 30-31

113. Communal Award : The British Premier, Mr. Ramsay Mac Donald, on August 16,1932
offered the Communal Award. By it the Muslims, Sikhs, Indian Christians and other
minorities were given the right of separate electorates in the Legislative Assembly.

51
 Separate electorates in few important seats were reserved for the depressed classes in
the Hindu community by the Award. Separate section within the Hindu community
added fuel to fire, the nationalist upsurge acquired a new height and Gandhi started
his fast till death against the decision.
Sinha, N.K & A. C. Banerjee : - History of India, p. 663

114. Santanam, K. : Ambedkar’s Attack, p. 34

115. Sitarammyya, R : The History of the Indian. National Congresspp. 550-552

116. The Yeravada Pact : An agreement was reached on September 1932 between the
leaders of the depressed classes and the rest of the Hindu community. This was in suppression
of the decision of the British Government regarding communal representation proposed in
the Constitution of India
1) . Seats shall be reserved for the depressed classes out of the general electorate seats in the
Provincial Legislatures as follows :
Madras 30; Bombay with Sind 15; Punjab 8; Bihar and Orissa 18; Central Provinces 20;
Assam 7; Bengal 30; United Provinces 20; Total 148
The figures are based on the total strength of the Provincial Councils.
2) Election to these seats shall be by joint electorates subject, however, to 'the following
procedures :
All the members of the depressed classes registered in the general roll in a constituency will
form an electoral college, which will elect a panel of four candidates to the depressed classes
for each of such reserved seats, by the method of the single vote; the four persons getting the
highest number of votes in such primary election shall be candidates for election by the general
electorate.
3) Representation of the depressed classes in the Central Legislature shall likewise be on the
principle of joint electorates and reserved seats by the method of primary election in the manner
provided for in clause 2 above, for their representation in the Provincial legislatures.
4) In the Central Legislature, eighteen percent of seats allotted to the general electorate for
British India in the said legislature shall be reserved for the depressed classes.

5) The system of primary election to a panel of candidates for election to the Central and
Provincial Legislatures, as hereinbefore mentioned, shall come to an end after the first ten
years, unless terminated sooner by mutual agreement under the provision of clause 6 below :
6) The system of representation of the depressed class by reserved seats in the Provincial and
Central Legislatures as provided for in clause 1 and 4 shall continue until determined by mutual
agreement between communities concerned in the settlement.

52
7) Franchise for the Central and Provincial Legislatures for the depressed classes.
8) There shall be no disabilities attaching to any one on the ground of his being a member of
the depressed classes in regard to any election to local bodies or appointments to public services.
Every endeavour shall be made to secure fair representation of the depressed classes in these
respects, subject to such educational qualifications as may be laid down for appointment to the
public services.

9) In every province, out of the educational grant, an adequate sum shall be earmarked for
providing educational facilities to the members of the depressed classes :

All the leaders present in Poona including Pandit Malaviya, Dr. Ambedkar, Dr. Solanki, Rao
Bahadur Srinivasan, Sir Tej Bahadur, M.C. Raja, Mr. R Ballo, Mr. Rajbhoj and Shivraj signed
the agreement.
Indian National Congress - Collection of Resolutions, pp. 170-171

117. Poona Pack please refer to Yarvada Pact, 116

118. Santanam, K. : Ambedkar’s Attack, p. 35

119. Montagu-Chemsford Report: The growing strength of the nationalist movement during
the First World War made it necessary for the British Government to listen to the demands of
the Congress. There was, as yet, no question of struggle, violent or non-violent, for the
achievement of Swaraj, self-government was expected to come through ‘progressive
improvement in our mental, moral and material condition’. But the united front presented by
the Indian leaders and the part played by India in the War led the British Government to
survey the Indian problem, in Asquith’s words, ‘from a new angle of vision’. The conclusion
formed by the British Government was put in the Montagu-Chelmsford Report thus:
“ Indians must be enabled in so far as they attain responsibility to determine for themselves
what they want to be done.”
On August 20, 1917 Mr. E.S. Montagu, Secretary of State for India, declared in the House of
Commons :
“ The policy of His Majesty’s Government, with which the Government of India are in full
accord, is that of the increasing association of Indians in every branch of the administration
and the gradual development of self-governing institutions with a view to the progressive
realization of responsible Government in India as an integral part of the British Empire.”

The Secretary of State came to India in November, 1917, and discussed the scheme of reforms
with the Viceroy, Lord Chelmsford (1916-21), and some eminent British civil servants and

53
Indian politicians. The results of these discussions were embodied in the Montagu-Chelmsford
Report, which was published in July, 1918. The Government of India Act of 1919 was based
on that report.

120. Resolutions : DatedJanuary 16 and 18, 1935. Congress Working Committee issued
the resolutions concerning safeguards to the depressed classes.

54