Understanding Ambedkar’s Views through His Essay “An Annihilation of Caste”

Introduction

Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, more commonly known as Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, was a renowned ‘untouchable’ leader and dual-doctoral graduate from Columbia University and the London School of Economics.^[1] In the words of Member of Parliament, Shashi Tharoor, “arguably, there is no more important figure in contemporary India, after Mahatma Gandhi, than Dr. Ambedkar.”^[2] Tharoor is a member of the Indian National Congress, the opposition party in present-day India. While this 20th-century political party has survived into the modern-day, thanks to Ambedkar’s efforts, caste-based discrimination did not accompany it in the legislature. Ambekar was a controversial figure during his lifetime, yet his stature grew posthumously as his efforts became recognized.^[3] As a member of the lowest Hindu caste, i.e. untouchables, Ambedkar faced severe caste-based discrimination at an early age.^[4] Consequently, he worked tirelessly to abolish the caste system and attain equal status for untouchables.^[5] In doing so, Ambedkar successfully challenged millennia-old discrimination against the untouchable community, who are now known as Dalits, and instituted “the world’s oldest and farthest-reaching affirmative action programme for his people.”^[6] In an effort to demonstrate the landmark efforts undertaken by Ambedkar, this article showcases the policies that he advocated for through an analysis of his published essay, The Annihilation of Caste, coupled with the historical context that surrounded it.

The Publication of Annihilation of Caste

By 1932, the untouchable community began organizing itself under Ambedkar’s leadership, and they opposed Gandhi because while he supported untouchability’s removal, he was not against the caste system.^[7] To shine light on his cause and ensure untouchables were protected in post-independence India, Ambedkar utilized opportunities that other entities, including the Indian National Congress, boycotted, such as the Roundtable Conference.^[8] By attending this conference, Ambedkar was able to garner the support of British colonial authorities, which proved vital to his eventual abolition of the ‘untouchable’ caste. As part of his opposition to the caste system, in 1936, Ambedkar published an essay titled, The Annihilation of Caste. Authored by Ambedkar himself, the publication is incredibly insightful to individuals researching opposition to India’s caste system.

To understand Ambedkar’s policies, one must first turn to the context surrounding them. In 1932, a few years before Ambedkar’s essay was published, the Communal Award was announced, which established special electorates for minorities such as the untouchables.^[9] However, to abrogate this award, Gandhi began fasting to death; he believed the untouchables must remain part of the Hindu community.^[10] This move yielded the 1932 Poona Pact, a settlement between Gandhi and Ambedkar, which replaced the special electorates with a larger number of seats reserved for untouchables in various Indian legislatures.^[11] At this time, untouchables were promised “equal access to wells, roads, temples, and other public places.” However, these promises took “decades to become reality.”^[12] Accordingly, when examining Ambedkar’s work, one must bear in mind that he was writing at a time when untouchables were not equal members of the Indian nation.^[13]

As its title suggests, in The Annihilation of Caste, Ambedkar argued that the caste system must be abolished. He used political, economic, and historical examples to support his reasoning. Importantly, Ambedkar wrote amidst swaraj – i.e. independence – movements.^[14] Thereby, he presented the abolition of the caste system as essential to the formation of an Indian nation.^[15] Ambedkar originally wrote this essay as a speech for the Jat-Pat-Todak Mandal Conference, but when the Mandal demanded that he remove critiques of the Hindu religion from his speech, Ambedkar refused to preside over the conference.^[16] He later published the draft speech as this essay, titling it The Annihilation of Caste.

In his piece, Ambedkar acknowledges that his views are not widely accepted, stating it is unlikely the Mandal’s audience would have appreciated him serving as president. In explaining this opposition, Ambedkar, interestingly, differentiated between politically and religiously minded Hindus, citing that he would likely offend both groups by serving as the Mandal’s President. The political Hindus would be insulted by his questioning of Gandhi’s authority, while religious Hindus would find his low caste repugnant.^[17] This distinction revealed that many Hindus supported Gandhi politically, regardless of whether they supported the caste system. Accordingly, via this admission, Ambedkar led his readers to question why the Mandal approached him to be President.

Key Argument: Political Reform Cannot Occur Without Social Reform

Ambedkar also opposed the Indian National Congress’s view that political reform is possible without social reform. He successfully supported his argument with a comparison of the National Congress and Social Conferences. Ambdekar revealed that these two organizations were founded together and worked as “two wings of a common party” until the Congress stopped supporting the Conference, instead prioritizing political reform.^[18] Particularly captivating is Ambedkar’s inclusion of a quote from W.C. Bonnerji’s speech in 1892. This quote not only provides historical context, but it also spotlights the broader perspective that much of Ambedkar’s audience held regarding social reform. Bonnerji’s speech highlights that the Congress considered social reform less important than political reform. Bonnerji’s statements reflected that the Congress did not prioritize women’s rights or view India’s social beliefs as problematic. Notably, Bonnerji openly — seemingly proudly — accepted child marriage and the prohibition of widow remarriage.^[19] Bonnerji’s speech also reflected the role of anti-Western sentiments in Indian political nationalism. Bonnerji states, “Are we not fit (for political reform)…because we do not send our daughters to Oxford and Cambridge?”^[20] The selection of this quote reflects Ambedkar’s writing expertise, as in only a few sentences, he was able to successfully map out India’s social terrain.

To emphasize the need for social reform, Ambedkar provides various cases of the Hindus discriminating against untouchable communities, equating the treatment to “tyranny.”^[21] He enhances his argument by ensuring these examples are from regions across India, rather than a singular location.^[22] Ambedkar also boosts his arguments using concepts that society already accepts, as he asserts, “Every Congressman who repeats the dogma of Mill that one country is not fit to rule another country, must admit that one class is not fit to rule another class.”^[23] He deduces that while the high-caste enlightened Hindus who comprised the Social Conference considered reforming Hindu familial traditions such as widow remarriage and child marriage, they did not consider the restructuring of Hindu society and its caste system.^[24] This draws parallels to British colonial strategy, as they wanted to reform Hindu traditions to show progress but were only willing to abolish practices that were not widely practiced, such as sati.^[25] Ambedkar also asserts that social reform is necessary for economic success, exemplifying that the caste system is economically inefficient, because when individuals are forced to choose occupations based on their caste, “their hearts nor their minds are in their work.”^[26]

Social Reform as Necessitated by Foreign and National History

Ambedkar further supports his view that social reform is necessary with references to European history, including that of Prussia, Rome, Ireland, and England.^[27] He also utilizes the fundamentals of Socialism to support his argument, thereby appealing to India’s Socialists.^[28] Through these references to European phenomena, Ambedkar’s work reflects his foreign high-level education, and it also reveals his target audience as enlightened individuals, such as the Hindus who comprised the Social Conference. Ambedkar seems to be inspired greatly by French revolutionary ideals, as he states his ideal society would be based on the French revolutionary slogan, “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity.”^[29] Ambedkar connects his European examples to India’s history, while also using the religious histories of Islam, Sikhism, and Buddhism to support his arguments.^[30] This consideration of other religions also reflects that Ambedkar was considering leaving Hinduism. Here, Ambedkar’s views resemble those of Gandhi, who was also inspired by Western concepts while promoting Indian self-rule.^[31]

Abolishment of Caste as Necessary for Nationalism

Concerning nationalism, Ambedkar further contends that unifying the nation is impossible without abolishing the caste system; he argues that since each caste has a differing culture, dines among itself, and marries among itself, India can never truly form one nation.^[32] Ambedkar supports this argument by exploring shuddhi, a measure introduced by the Arya Samaj to increase membership in the Hindu religion.^[33] He asserts that if caste remains, this aim cannot be achieved, and shuddhi “will be both a folly and a futility.”^[34]

Vision for Secular State: Religious Reform as a Prerequisite to Abolishing Caste

In addition to proposing that abolishing caste is required to perpetuate political and economic reform, Ambedkar advocates for religious reform, expanding on his belief that “It is not possible to break Caste without annihilating the religious notions on which it…is founded.”^[35] While earlier religious revival movements in India proposed returning to an ancient Indian text to revive Hindu values, Ambedkar proposes that there should be a new standard book established for the Hindu religion and that texts such as the Vedas, Shastras, and Puranas should cease to be authoritative.^[36] He also asserts that the priesthood should be earned by passing an exam administered by the State, instead of being hereditary.^[37] This argument is particularly intriguing as the vision of India emerging at this time was that of a secular state; thus, it is questionable how the State would be qualified to administer a religious examination.

Conclusion

Overall, in The Annihilation of Caste, Ambedkar blends reason, economic, and political benefits to demonstrate that India’s best interests lie in abolishing the caste system. He argues the struggle for swaraj is simpler than that of abolishing the caste system, for the former has the support of the nation, while the latter is a fight against the nation.^[38] Ambedkar presents a strong argument supported by convincing examples and calls upon his audience to eliminate the caste system. However, he does not present a plan for how the caste system should be abolished. Rather, after describing the issues posed by caste, he concludes by declaring that he is leaving the Hindu fold.^[39] Here, his argument that the Hindu caste system has infected Christianity, Islam, and Sikhism foreshadows Ambedkar’s later conversion to Buddhism.

Ambedkar’s work significantly impacted the political sphere as he accompanied his publication with heavy political advocacy for the untouchables through other avenues that arose during the independence movement, notably the Roundtable Conference. Following the support generated by The Annihilation of Caste and his other political efforts, Ambedkar was appointed as Chair of the Drafting Committee for the Indian Constitution, signed on January 26, 1950.^[40] Through this role, Ambedkar ensured that the post-independence constitution finally outlawed untouchability.^[41] Though it took several decades and the failure of Ambedkar’s Hindu Code Bill – an attempt to reform Hindu personal laws – following which he accepted Buddhism, Ambedkar’s efforts ultimately brought noteworthy measures for the untouchables.^[42] To continue the reservation of seats for the former untouchables in the legislature, the group was listed on a special schedule in the constitution and became known as part of the Scheduled Castes and Tribes.^[43] While caste-baste discrimination persists in India on a societal level, due to B.R. Ambedkar’s efforts, the Scheduled Castes and Tribes are now protected by the law, can take pride in their identity, and have a voice in parliament.^[44]

 

Bibliography

Ambedkar, B.R. The Annihilation of Caste, 1936.

Bose, Sugata, and Ayesha Jalal. 2004. Modern South Asia: History, Culture, Political Economy. Florence: Taylor & Francis Group. Accessed March 27, 2025. ProQuest Ebook Central.

Laxman, Shibi. “Many Voices of ‘Nation’: Anti-Caste and Women’s Political Participation” HIS282Y1: History of South Asia. Class lecture at University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, February 25, 2025.

Mani, Lata. 2023. Contentious Traditions: The Debate on Sati in Colonial India. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Metcalf, Barbara D, and Thomas R Metcalf. 2006. A Concise History of Modern India, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Moon, Vasant, ed. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches (Part One: Sections I to III). Vol. 14, 2013.

Sangal, Neha, Jonathan Evans, Ariana Monique Salazar, Kelsey Jo Starr, and Manolo Corich. “Religion in India: Tolerance and Segregation — Attitudes about Caste.” Pew Research Center, June 29, 2021. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2021/06/29/attitudes-about-caste/.

Tharoor, Shashi. “Why India Today Shouldn’t Forget the Legacy of Ambedkar.” Time, May 24, 2023. https://time.com/6282089/india-today-legacy-ambedkar/.

1. Shibi Laxman. “Many Voices of ‘Nation’: Anti-Caste and Women’s Political Participation.” HIS282Y1: History of South Asia (class lecture at University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, January 16, 2025); Barbara D Metcalf and Thomas R Metcalf, A Concise History of Modern India, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 232. ↑
2. Shashi Tharoor, “Why India Today Shouldn’t Forget the Legacy of Ambedkar,” Time, May 24, 2023, https://time.com/6282089/india-today-legacy-ambedkar/. ↑
3. Shashi Tharoor, “Why India Today Shouldn’t Forget the Legacy of Ambedkar,” Time, May 24, 2023. ↑
4. Shibi Laxman. “Many Voices of ‘Nation’.” ↑
5. Metcalf and Metcalf, 194. ↑
6. Shashi Tharoor, “Why India Today Shouldn’t Forget the Legacy of Ambedkar,” Time, May 24, 2023. ↑
7. Shibi Laxman. “Many Voices of ‘Nation’.”; Metcalf and Metcalf, 194. ↑
8. Shibi Laxman. “Many Voices of ‘Nation’.” ↑
9. Metcalf and Metcalf, 194. ↑
10. Metcalf and Metcalf, 194. ↑
11. Metcalf and Metcalf, 194; Sugata Bose and Ayesha Jalal, Modern South Asia: History, Culture, Political Economy, 2nd ed. (New York: Routledge, 2004), 124. ↑
12. Metcalf and Metcalf, 194-195. ↑
13. Metcalf and Metcalf, 194. ↑
14. Bose and Jalal,, 124. ↑
15. B.R. Ambedkar, The Annihilation of Caste, 1936, 18-19. ↑
16. Ambedkar, 5, 9. ↑
17. Ambedkar, 10. ↑
18. Ambedkar, 11. ↑
19. Ambedkar, 11. ↑
20. Ambedkar, 11. ↑
21. Ambedkar, 12. ↑
22. Ambedkar, 11-12. ↑
23. Ambedkar, 13. ↑
24. Ambedkar, 13. ↑
25. Lata Mani, Contentious Traditions: The Debate on Sati in Colonial India (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2023), 93. ↑
26. B.R. Ambedkar, The Annihilation of Caste, 1936, 17. ↑
27. Ambedkar, 13-15. ↑
28. Ambedkar, 14-16. ↑
29. Ambedkar, 23-24. ↑
30. Ambedkar, 14. ↑
31. Metcalf and Metcalf, 172. ↑
32. Ambedkar, 19. ↑
33. Metcalf and Metcalf, 141. ↑
34. Ambedkar, 22. ↑
35. Ambedkar, 1. ↑
36. Metcalf and Metcalf, 141; Ambedkar, 37. ↑
37. Ambedkar, 37. ↑
38. Ambedkar, 40. ↑
39. Ambedkar, 40. ↑
40. Metcalf and Metcalf, 230, 232. ↑
41. Metcalf and Metcalf, 230, 232. ↑
42. Shibi Laxman. “Many Voices of ‘Nation’”; Metcalf and Metcalf, 232; Vasant Moon, ed., Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches (Part One: Sections I to III), vol. 14, 2013. ↑
43. Metcalf and Metcalf, 232-233. ↑
44. Neha Sangal et al., “Religion in India: Tolerance and Segregation — Attitudes about Caste,” Pew Research Center, June 29, 2021, https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2021/06/29/attitudes-about-caste/; Shashi Tharoor, “Why India Today Shouldn’t Forget the Legacy of Ambedkar,” Time, May 24, 2023. ↑