Shridhar Tilve

IN MEOMERY OF BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR 10 NOTES ON SRUSHTIYATA AND INDIAN ENLIGHTENMENT 30th Nov to 8th Dec

SHRIDHAR TILVE-NAIK
AGAM VERSES NIGAM BATTLE CONTINUE

FROM MAHATMA JYOTIRAO GOVINDRAO PHULE

(11 April 1827 – 28 November 1890) TO BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR

As I elaborated in first part Indian society is made up of following SAMUDAYS.
1. Purohit SAMUDAY
2. Shasak SAMUDAY
3. Vyapari SAMUDAY
4. Shetkari SAMUDAY
5. Pashupalak SAMUDAY
6. Aadivasi SAMUDAY
7. Das SAMUDAY
8. Bhatake SAMUDAY

9 Dnyan SAMUDAY

10 SRUJAN SAMUDAY

Mahatma Jyotiba Phule was the first thinker emerged from Shetkari SAMUDAY (peasantry community ) who by birth was gardener( his father was working as gardner and supplier of flowers in service of peshwa) with surname GORHE and by work Vyapari SAMUDAY(Mercantile community), the contractor supplier for Khadakwasla bridge and other projects. At his time Pune was dominated by Brahmins and whole education system was possessed by them. Naturally in 1857 when the separate department for Sanskrit was abolished Pandits declined to teach that language to non-Brahmins. It was an educational traditional mutiny like 1857's mutiny of independence organized by Brahmins which clearly indicated that an education for non-Brahmins would not be an easy thing. When MAHATMA JYOTIRAO GOVINDRAO PHULE was arrived on the scene of social reformation, Brahmins verses non- Brahmins debate was fully on in education field of Pune. Naturally his initial five books

1. Trutiya Ratna (3^rd jwel) A Drama,

2. Kulhwadibhushan Chhatrapati Shivaji Raje Bhonsle yancha powada,

3. Our Brahmin-ridden Policy- Educational System,

4. Brahmnache Kasab (the skill-craft of Brahmins)

5. Gulamgiri 1873

were focused on an exploitation of Brahmins and their dominance. When he assessed the backwardness of majority of Indian community he found that the lack of knowledge is the main problem and he held responsible Brahmins for it. His mission was Liberty for all uneducated people and education for all. His concern was for whole humanity. Naturally he dedicated his book GULAMGIRI to THE GOOD PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES

Here I am giving his dedication

THE GOOD PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES

As a token of admiration for their

SUBLIME DISINTERESTED AND
SELF SACRIFICING DEVOTION

in the cause of Negro Slavery; and with
an earnest desire, that my countrymen
may take their noble example as their guide
in the emancipation of their Shudra Brethren
from the trammels of Brahmins thraldom

THE AUTHOR

According to his theory in Gulamgiri (page 143 Mahatma Phule Samagr Wangmay) Irani Arya Bhattas came from Iran and conquered India and enslaved original inhabitant of India. According to him ''The cast system'' was introduced by Irani Arya Bhattas to create distinction between low and high and must be abandoned. Division among people should be based on their qualities not on birth. () According to Phule whole Shudra and Atishudra community was slave of Brahmins. Brahmins by writing books established their authority over the mind of Indian people and prohibited them from education and as he said “Vidde vina mati geli, mativina niti geli; Nitivina gati geli. Gativina vitta gele, Vittavina Shudra khachle, Itake anarth eka aviddhene kele”

Naturally Mahatma Phule established the SOCIETY titled ''Society for the teaching of knowledge to Mahar, Mang , to other people'' in 1853 and opened the well of water for untouchables.

and opened the first school for the children of untouchable in 1852 .

Mahatma Phule has special concern for liberation of women . HE established first non-christen girls school in Pune with the help of Brahman friend AND also opened a home where unmarried mothers could deliver their illegitimate children in secrecy in 1853.

An education of Shudra and Atishudra and women was his mission which he did vehemently. In this sense he was the true pioneer of these classes.

He realized that all Samaj created by Brahmins like Brahmo Samaj, Prarthana Samaj, Arya Samaj are not enough for Non-Brahmins. So he set up his own samaj in 1873 titled ''Satyashodhak Samaj.'' He introduced new rituals and tried to free non-Brahmins from Brahmanical religion. It was natural because in nineteen century Kshatriya and Vaishyas were not in position to found new samaj. So only Shudras are much more sincere about it and Mahatma Jyotirao Phule did it perfectly.

He has given following principles
1. All men and women are born equal and eligible to consume all kind of consumption.
2. Respect Nirmik (Creater) Don’t respect any idol.
3. Don’t do Namsmaran and don’t carry useless system of Prasad.
4. Don’t hurt any animal because they are created by NIRMIK.
5. Don’t Rape any man or woman personally or collectively.
6. Nirmik has given honor, Religion and Political freedom to all men and woman.
7. Don’t snatch rights of others
8. Don’t commit adultery. Except husband and wife all human being are brothers and sisters.
9. Every human being has right to express but remember nobody should hurt anybody and cause loss for any community.
10. Nobody should hurt any human being because of political and religious difference in thought.
11. Except murderer or violent animal nobody should kill anybody.
12. Do not think or treat any human being unholy by birth or religion.

He thought that Hindu religion was worst religion created by Brahmins run by Brahmins for exploitation of Shudra Atishudra and women.
Till date it is debatable question what did he mean by Shudra. According to some scholars Shudra means all non-Brahmins community and for some scholars it means Shudra Atishudra and women.
This questions is till dominating Indian Politics because every party is using the turm ‘Bahujan Samaj’ and for some it is non-Brahmins and for some it means OBC, BC and Adivasi.

It is really surprising that not a single samaj was established by any Kshatriy or Vaishya . So it is not surprising that in educational field these communities remain backward compare to others. In this period rich Kshatriy/Vaishya sent their children to foreign country or appoint personal teachers or coaches.

After 1870 famines happened frequently in India and position of peasantry became worst and as usual British didn’t bother about it. Mahatma presented state and position of peasants before BRITISH GOVT. to change agricultural policy. He wrote a book on it title ''Shetkaryancha Asud '' and explored all their problem which are still applicable to contemporary condition.

If we carefully observe nineteenth century we find 3 tendency prevailed in India.
1^st Dharm Tendency, Striving for Moksh or Salvation.
2^nd Samaj Tendency Religious institution for social reformation.
3^rd Freedom Tendency for Political Power.
As Babasaheb Ambedkar wrote in his essay titled ''Ranade, Gandhi and Jinha '' after 1870 the decadence of social reformation agenda happened everywhere and political agenda captured Indian mind.

Mahatma Jyotirao Phule was the first reformer who introduced 4th type mission type and the debate which was only intellectual transform into social activism.

Question arose why all Samaj failed to create castles society ? Reason is obvious. Every Samaj was unintentionally limited to its own cast circle or Varna circle. Natuarally so called open system of Samaj didn’t flourish and inter cast marriages remained dream. Jyotiba Phule tried best but except one marriage in sarasvat Samaj he also failed in this matter.

His theory created rift between Brahmins and Non-Brahmins and finally culminated into Brahmna- Brahmnetar Vad which is still going on face book also and surprisingly nobody is learning any lesson from it. His theory has been developed by A H Salunke and Sharad Patil in POST EIGHTY Maharashtra with much more scientific accuracy and evidences and nobody knows what is the future of this debate? One thing is sure after 1990 this debate has re-introduced Verna vyavstha by birth which was not Phule’s intention. Some people are blaming Brahmins for everything which is ridiculous but unfortunately the blame is going on. The current generation of Brahmins do not understand crime of their generation. For them whatever happened in past is history now and we current generation is not responsible for it. Surprisingly when it comes to MUSLIMS these secular thinkers are ready to forget past and also shut up their mouth but when it comes to Brahmans they were ready to go three thousand years back . This contradiction in treatment is so obvious that whole enlightenment project is thwarted by it. New generation of Brahmins think that current India is asking for quality and in return Bahujan Samaj is providing excuses instead of quality. Mahatma Phule didn’t envisioned this.

Then question arose what is the contribution of Mahatma Jyotiba Phule?

First of all his educational work opened door for Bahujan Samaj.

Second he was the first one who tried to reform the condition of untouchables after Basweshwar.

Third instead of only debating he introduced missionary activism with intellectual discourse. He always verified discourse with life, action and activity.

Fourth he was the one who put forward the conditions of peasants in front of Government and society.

Fifth though his theory was rough and based on Aryan invasion theory innovated by Maxmuller and though our generation in Marathi consistently challenging his premises I have to admit that it was his theory which first time in the history of modern India underlined exploitation of Brahmin as a class. He was against Brahmanya not Brahmins but unfortunately his followers didn’t understand it.

He was IN TRUE SENSE ''Mahatma'' the title given by people and'' Real Mahatma'' the title given by Mahatma Gandhi As I said he prepared all instruments for BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR and it became big shot duty of Babasaheb to create India's best and largest compassionate ideology . BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR fulfilled it and created an ideology which encompassed all problems and possible solutions under one umbrella. Nobody was like him and probably nobody will like him.

MAHATMA JYOTIBA PHULE WAS THE BEGUINING and when he died in 1890 only after one year BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR borne who carried his legacy and reached at its culmination.

CHATRAPATI SHAHU :KINGSIZE MISSIONARY WORK

He is the man who was responsible for my upbringing in Kolhapur as my father entered in Kolhapur because he knew that blessing of SHAHU MAHARAJ AND RAJARAM MAHARAJ would be always there for us. Being Kolhapuri first manacha mujra to him and then analysis of his work.

There was something missionary type in Swami Dayanand Sarswati but real ARYA SAMAJIST EXPRESSION appeared in form of Maharaj He was borne on 26 th June 1874 and became Raja in 1894 and Maharaja in 1900

Vedokt prakaran changed his life forever. The Brahmin priests of the Royal family refused to perform the rites of the non-Brahmans because according to Avtar theory all kshatriyas were killed by PARSHURAM and whoever remained are not KSHTRIYAS . Same with Vaishyas. According to this theory in KALIYUG all vaishyas are disappeared and whoever remained are not Vaishyas. It means there are only two varnas in Hindu society i.e. BRAHMINS AND SHUDRAS. According to vaidik Shudras don't have any right on vedik mantras. With this logic The Brahmin priests refused to do vedik rites. Maharaj consulted with some people . At that time Arya Samajist said that everybody has right over Vedas and anybody can learn Vedik Mantras. Following it he rebelled against established Vedik religion and removed Priests and appointed '' KSHATRA JAGADGURU '' who was by birth MARATHA . It gave new dimension to BRAHMIN/NONBRAHMIN debate. It also cleared the definition of Bahujan because first time BRAHMINS cleared their stand and to whom they said SHUDRAS . The incident made MAHARAJA leader of Non-brahmins.

He realized that Cast system is the curse and education is the remedy. He opened schools and hostels everywhere and subsidized education in Kolhapur State and in later period made it free . Because of him rural students came forward for education because they had hostel facility. Rajaram college , Victoria Maratha Boarding School, Miss Clarke Boarding School and Deccan Rayat Sanstha are some of his famous hostels and education institutes . He was the one who introduced reservation policy which later became national policy.

Suddenly Kolhapur appeared on the map of reformation-age and attracted many thinkers and artists. The culture flourished in every aspect. Well-known educationist J P NAIK structured whole city properly.

MAHARAJ set up Shahu Chhatrapati Weaving and Spinning Mill in 1906 to raise the employment. The foundation stone for the Radhanagari Dam was also laid down in 1909 for improvement of irrigation and water supply.

Unfortunately Avtar theory is still on in the mind of traditional brahmins in 21st century.They still avoide Vedik mantras if yajman is Non-brahmins. In village Brahmins use Shaiv mantra for marraige ceremony if yajman is SHUDRA. Nobody notice it because nobody bothers. For them celebration is more important than ceremony and mantras are rituals. They are carrying it as tradition.

After death of SHAHU MAHARAJ brahman-brahmneter wad reached it's peak and in final fight lost its significance. I was not only end of SHAHU MAHARAJ but also it was the end of KOLHAPURI MODERNITY. The city lost touch of modernity forever with some exceptions .IN MEOMERY OF BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR 10 NOTES ON SRUSHTIYATA AND INDIAN ENLIGHTENMENT 30th Nov to 8th Dec

SHRIDHAR TILVE-NAIK NAVBOUDH AGAM V/S NIGAM

BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR: THE PROPHET WHO WAS NEVER EXPECTED part 1

I don’t know what Prophet means but I am sure about one thing . Some Prophets used to give basic laws for their society. Ambedkar was such Prophet which nobody has predicted and yet he came , see and gave one of the best constitution .

I always feel that in this world in 3000 if humankind is saved and survived and if anybody write history of 20^th century he/ she will write that American people, German people and Indian people were worst human being ON THE EARTH because they did inhuman exploitation following false ideology and showed murderous attitude towards negro, Jews and untouchables. Probably he/ she will give first number to Indians as most insensitive people towards human being . The cruel attitude of savarna Hindus toward untouchable WILL DEFINITLY GIVE THEM FIRST RANK IN INSENSITIVITY . Surprisingly India is the country of religions which is screaming and shouting for oneness and advait and on another level She is the country of hundreds of cast. Naturally each cast has its own Panchayat and law system also . On such background when Babasaheb Ambedkar arrived on the scene of social reformation nobody had expected a man from untouchables will give best constitution for his country.

He was born in Kabir panth and ended as Buddhist . He was the son of soldier and in the end he was the senapati of seven crores of untouchables .

He studied at the Elphinstone high school and later at Elphinstone college. Sayajiroa Gayakwad the Maharaja of Badoda helped Ambedkar to continue his study in Columbia university from 1913 to 1916 and later he went to London with a scholarship granted by Chhatrapati Shahu Maharaja of Kolhapur. He started his work as barrister and soon more focused into the struggle of untouchables. He was utilitarian in the sense that he always thought about everything in context of usefulness FOR HIS MISSION : AN ANIHHILATION OF UNTOUCHABILITY. He was deeply influenced by HIS TEACHER John Dewey. Naturally he was influenced by rationalism and utilitarianism and IN HIS YOUNG AGE on basis of them he rejected Vedas. According to Brahmins Vedas are Aparivartaniya naturally Ambedkar realized that Vedic philosophy is not going to change. He also denied Upanishad as an imaginary thing.

He started his party named independent labor party in 1936 , became professor and principle of Law college Bombay and in 1942 he established scheduled cast federation. After independence he was the chairman of drafting committee appointed by the constituent assembly. He worked as law minister in Nehru Mantrimandal but resign from the cabinet on the issue of revised Hindu code bill. Unfortunately he was defeated at the election to the parliament and state assembly. It was last social sorrow given by Indians to him. He realized that he is still not accommodated in Hindu Religion. He decided to abandon Hindu dharm.

He was not the first one who came to this conclusion.

Before him in South India Iyothee Thass (1845 -1914) passed through same pain. Though revivalism of Buddhist religion started in 1891 by a SHRILANKAN BUDHDHIST ANGARIKA DHARMPAL who founded MAHA BODHI SOCIETY it spread only after an entry of Iyothee Thass . Iyothee Thass was a dalit and practitioner of Siddha Medicine. He is regarded as pioneer of Dravidian Movement. In 1886 he declared that untouchables were not Hindus . He urged dalits to register themselves as castless Dravidian.

He then asked basic question '' WHO WERE UNTOUCHABLES? ''

AND DECLARED THAT UNTOUCHABLES WERE BUDHDHIST AND ARYAN INVASION MADE THEM THE UNTOUCHABLE .

Later Babasaheb Ambedkar accepted this theory and gave support with new evidences .

Iyothee Thass abandoned hindu religion and received diksha from Srilankan Buddhist monk Bikkhu Sumangala Nayake . He founded the PUNCHMAR /DRAVID MAHAJANA SABHA in 1891 and established the Sakya Buddhist Society in Madras also known as the Indian Buddhist Association. The German born American PAUL CARUS was the president of it . Later he wrote an important book titled '' THE GOSPEL OF BUDHDHA ''in 1894. After the year 1898 Indian Buddhist Association had branches all over South India .

Another convert from South India was DHARMANAND KOSAMBI A MAN FROM GOA . In 1902 he was ordained as a BUDHDHIST MONK .

He wrote a biography of Buddha titled ''Bhagwan Buddha'' in 1940 in Marathi which is classic in my opinion..

Though Bengalis were little bit late , they also emerged in 1892 with the establishment of Bengal Buddhist Association in Calcutta by BARUA BUDHIST COMMUNITY under religious leadership of KRIPASARAN MAHASTHVIR. He established vihar in Lucknow, Hyderabad, Shillong and Jamshedpur. He didn't get support initially but after 7 lectures on BUDDHA AND BUDDHISM by Swami Vivekananda everything FOR BUDDHISM changed.

Lecture 1 date 26 th sep 1893 CHICAGO the relation between Buddhism and Hinduism see PAGE 17 collected works of swami Vivekananda in Marathi VOL 1

Lecture 2 date 1893 buddha and Christ 1893 see page 125 vol 10

Lecture 3 date 1893 bhagwan buddha Detrait CITY USA see page 153 vol 4

Lecture 4 date 19 march 1894 detrait light of asia see page 226 vol 7

Lecture 5 date 4 FEB 1895 BROOKLYN THE REAL BOUDHDHARM see PAGE 325 VOL 9

Lecture 6 date 24 march 1896 Harvard university boudhdharm and vedant see page 239 vol 8

Lecture 7 date 18th march 1900 SANFRANSCISCO budhdevacha jagala sandesh see page 207 volume 6

Though Vivekananda wasn't officially Buddhist, in his first lecture in Chicago dated 26 th sep 1893 he proclaimed that though I am not officially Buddhist there is nothing wrong if you called me BUDDHIST.

In 1914 a BRAHMIN FROM LUCKHNOW named Mukund Prakash was ordained as Bodhanand Mahastavir in the presence of KRIPASARAN MAHASTHVIR who founded BHARTIYE BUDDH SAMITI IN 1916 . Like Jyotiba Phule and Iyothee Thass he was also under the influence of ARYAN INVAISAN THEORY and wrote a book ''Mula Bharatavasi Aur Arya '' (''Original Inhabitants and Aryans '' ) He repeated theory of Jyotiba Phule. He was supported by another Buddhist ACHARYA ISHVARDATT MEDHAETHI who was initiated in Buddhism in 1937 by GRERMAN BUDDHIST GYAN KETO and strong critic of cast system in India . ACHARYA ISHVARDATT MEDHAETHI claimed that Dalits were ancient rulers and enslaved by Aryan Invaders.

Meanwhile Acharya Dharmananda Damodar Kosambi emerged as boudh achary and established good rapport with Babasaheb . After gathering knowledge from all over world and participating in compiling of VISUDDHIMAGGA in Harvard University he met Gandhi and started recruiting volunteers for SALT SATYAGRAH . He was imprisoned for six years for participating in SALT SATYAGRAH which affected his health badly. During this time he met Babasaheb Ambedkar and his thinking contributed lot in Ambedkar's decision to convert to Buddhism . He took decision to do sallekhana . Gandhiji tried his best to convince him but he took only one spoon of karela ras as a respect for Gandhi daily and abandoned his body to death in Sevagram near Vardha. He influenced Gandhi as well as Ambedkar in his own way . He was the intellectual bond between both leaders. Unfortunately he died in 1947 and Gandhi was shot by Nathuram Godse. Gandhi was the last chance for Hindus to stop the conversion of Ambedkar but Hindutwadi shot it and ended last chance.

IN MEOMERY OF BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR 10 NOTES ON SRUSHTIYATA AND INDIAN ENLIGHTENMENT 30th Nov to 8th Dec

SHRIDHAR TILVE-NAIK NAVBOUDH AGAM V/S NIGAM

. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR: THE PROPHET WHO WAS NEVER EXPECTED part 2

In first part we discuss conversions of Indians to Buddhism before Ambedkar . No doubt these conversions created background for Ambedkar but unfortunately all these conversions failed to gather social momentum. Naturally Babasaheb always thought that conversion in Buddhism means jump from one offshoot to another offshoot of Hindu Religion . He wanted liberty, equality and fraternity for all. When lokamanya Tilak said , ‘Swarajya is my birth right’ he proclaimed, “annihilation of untouchablity is my birth right”. He has himself experienced the untouchability and whenever he asked question WHY US ? an answer came. Hindu Dharmshastra. Nobody bother exploitation of untouchables because dharma shastra allowed it.
Why non-brahmins were doing it? Why they were listening Brahmins? Because non- Brahmins savarn believed that if they follow Dharma shastra they will get heaven after death. Their belief in heaven and hell is the root cause of behavior. Why they believe dharma shastra because they never questioned it. It was their ignorance . That is why '' knowledge'' became central theme for Ambedkar. He knew that only knowledge will liberate Hindus and untouchables. So he gave 2 Mul mantra ‘Shikha aani sanghathit wha’ (Learn and organize) ‘LEAVE villages and abandoned your job assigned by Dharm shastra and cast’. It was contrary to Gandhis preaching who said abandoned cities and go to the village.

After virshaiv lingayat and Sikh Ambedkar was the third who asked his follower ‘Never ashamed of materialism’. Result is obvious. After lingayat and sikh , navbodhha are emerging fastest to become well settled and learned.

As IGNORENCE is the reason AND EDUCATION is the key to annihilate social suffering Ambedkar asked his followers to learn and learn more. Result is obvious now they are competing Brahmins in matter of knowledge.

He didn’t believe god and held responsible '' theory of rebirth '' for the position of untouchable. Buddhism was full of it . Naturally Buddhism was not his first choice initially .

Question arose Why he didn't go for ATHEISM which was more natural reaction from him. The reason is , after all he was AN INDIAN and also interested in final truth. Vedik , Brahmani tradition didn't allow moksha to untouchables. Vaishnav allowed Moksha but not an entry in temple for which he fought .DHARM ARTH were completely rejected to them . Vaishnavism allowed KAM with BETIBANDI. Naturally it wasn't fit for Ambedkar's agenda '' liberty, equality and fraternity for all..'' So for final emancipation from lust in form of Nirvana was much more better choice. Ambedkar wanted it so he didn't become ATHEIST.

In this era , along with Ambedkar, Gandhi , influenced by Maharshi Viththall Ramji Shinde and SATNAMI MOVEMENT was also leading the depressed classes and fighting for their rights. At that time Gandhi used to think that Indian cast system will not vanish and will be always prevailed . When they meet following conversation happened between them.

Gandhiji : Untouchables can keep ''cast '' and remove untouchability

Ambedkar : ''It's not possible''

Ambedkar was right in this matter and thinking of Gandhiji was absurd. Gandhiji was not in favour of conversion . Later Gandhi changed but it seems that traditional Ambedkarwadi don't want Modern Gandhi . The jealousy , cooperation and competition between these 2 leaders is still shaping Indian politics and both Gandhivadi and Ambedkarwadi are fighting each other without reading their letters to each other and understanding changing patterns of their social and political fabrics .(I have written about it in detail in MY BOOK ''ATMCHARITRATLE KALPNIK KSHAN'') In Marathi , traditional Gandhiwadi writers like Bhalchandra Nemade are providing support for Gandhi before 1930 and 75% Hindus are still Gandhiwadi in this matter.

Ambedkar knew the public support for Gandhi but he also knew that Gandhi is wrong . So in initial years he consistently asked Hindu to restructure their society and annihilate cast system for their betterment. In 1935 at Yevala he declared that he is thinking about leaving Hindu religion because Hindu religion is not giving justice to untouchable. On 13 October 1935 he declared ,''Unfortunately, I was born a Hindu. It was beyond my power to prevent that, but I solemnly assure you that I will not die a Hindu ''

After that he started to think about his choices . Initially he was thinking about Kabir Panth but soon realized that it is not national religion . . In 1936 he declared that he will embrace Sikhism but cancelled it because it was also not National Religion. He didn’t accept Jain because it was in minority and in 20 th century completly supporting CAST SYSTEM because of VAIDIK influence.

For some years he was seriously thinking about embracement of Christianity and Islam because he thought that an embracement of world religion will give him international support in case of emergency and more power also . Later he out rightly rejected Islam because he thought that if he did it , it will increase the Muslim population in India and it will change Hindu structure into Muslim structure which he didn’t want . He wanted to reject Hindu Dharma but not Hindu culture. He rejected Christianity because he thought that it would strengthen to British in India.

The only religion which was saved by time and which was also world religion was Buddhism . Like Ambedkar , Buddha also didn’t believe God, cast, Vedas, an authority of Vedas, Varnashram Vyavstha and superiority of Brahmins. Naturally he chose Buddha dharma as his dharma. After pure thinking about this religion he started reviewing Buddhism internally and found that Buddha religion was consisted of many Yans . Hinyan, Mahayan, Vajrayan, Sahajyan , Zen, Chan are important among them. All these yanas have some common belief

1 They believe 4 ARYA SATYE

2 They believe karma and rebirth theory

3 They belive the resons of PARIVRAJA given by of the tradition . All yanas believe that GAUTAM took Parivraja because he saw a dead person, a sick person and an old person.

All these yans were working and they have internal philosophical debate BUT ALL OF THEM BELIEVE THESE THREE ASPECTS

BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR: THE PROPHET WHO WAS NEVER EXPECTED part 3

According to Ambedkar all these traditional yanas are illogical and irrational. He wanted rational Buddha and rational influence also. Here Ambedkar encountered Shaivism. I have already proved that KAPILA was part of SHAIV darshan. BUDDHA was born and brought up in Kapilvastu.

Ambedkar writes,

''§2. Kapila— The Philosopher

1. Among the ancient philosophers of India the most pre-eminent was Kapila.

2. His philosophical approach was unique, and as philosopher he stood in a class by himself.

His philosophy was known as the Sankhya Philo-sophy.

3. The tenets of his philosophy were of a startling nature.

4. Truth must be supported by proof. This is the first tenet of the Sankhya system. There is no

truth without proof.

5. For purposes of proving the truth Kapila allowed only two means of proof—(1) perception

and (2) inference.

6. By perception is meant mental apprehension of a present object.

7. Inference is threefold: (1) from cause to effect, as from the presence of clouds to rain ; (2)

from effect to cause, as from the swelling of the streams in the valleys to rain in the hills,

and (3) by analogy, as when we infer from the fact that a man alters his place when he

moves that the stars must also move, since they appear in different places.

8. His next tenet related to causality—creation and its cause.

9. Kapila denied the theory that there was a being who created the universe. In his view a

created thing really exists beforehand in its cause just as the clay serves to form a pot, or

the threads go to form a piece of cloth.

10. This is the first ground on which Kapila rejected the theory that the universe was created

by a being.

11. But there are other grounds which he advanced in support of his point of view.

12. The non-existent cannot be the subject of an activity : There is no new creation. The

product is really nothing else than the material of, which it is composed : the product

exists before its coming into being in the shape of its material of which it is composed.

Only a definite product can be produced from such material ; and only a specific material

can yield a specific result.

13. What then is the source of the empirical universe ?

14. Kapila said the empirical universe consists of things evolved (Vyakta) and things that are

not evolved (Avyakta).

15. Individual things (Vyakta Vastu) cannot be the source of unevolved things (Avyakta

Vastu).

16. Individual things are all limited in magnitude and this is incompatible with the nature of

the source of the universe.

17. All individual things are analogous, one to another and, therefore, no one can be regarded

as the final source of the other. Moreover, as they all come into being from a source, they

cannot constitute that source.

18. Further, argued Kapila, an effect must differ from its cause, though it must consist of the

cause. That being so, the universe cannot itself be the final cause. It must be the product

of some ultimate cause.

19. When asked why the unevolved cannot be perceived, why does it not show movement

which would make it perceivable, Kapila replied :

20. " It may be due to various causes. It may be that its fine nature makes, it imperceptible,

just as other things of whose existence there is no doubt, cannot be perceived ; or because

of their too great a distance or proximity ; or through the intervention of a third object, or

through admixture with similar matter ; or through the presence of some more powerful

sensation, or the blindness or other defect of the senses or the mind of the observer."

21. When asked : "What then is the source of the universe ? What makes the difference

between the evolved and unevolved part of the universe ?

22. Kapila's reply was: 'Things that have evolved have a cause and the things that have not

evolved have also a cause. But the source of both is uncaused and independent.'

23. " The things that have evolved are many in number and limited in space and name. The

source is one, eternal and all-pervasive. The things evolved have activities and parts : the

source is imminent in all, but has neither activities nor parts."

24. Kapila argued that the process of develop-ment of the unevolved is through the activities

of three constituents of which it is made up, Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. These are called

three Gunas.

25. The first of the constituents, or factors, corresponds to what we call as light in nature,

which reveals, which causes pleasure to men ; the second is that impels and moves, what

produces activity ; the third is what is heavy and puts under restraint, what produces the

state of indifference or inactivity.

26. The three constituents act essentially in close relation, they overpower and support one

another and intermingle with one another. They are like the constituents of a lamp, the

flame, the oil and wick.

27. When the three Gunas are in perfect balance, none overpowering the other, the universe

appears static (Achetan) and ceases to evolve.

28. When the three Gunas are not in balance, one overpowers the other, the universe becomes

dynamic (sachetan) and evolution begins.

29. Asked why the Gunas become unbalanced, the answer which Kapila gave was this

disturbance in the balance of the three Gunas was due to the presence of Dukha

(suffering).

30. Such were the tenets of Kapila's philosophy.

31. Of all the philosophers the Buddha was greatly impressed by the doctrines of Kapila.

32. He was the only philosopher whose teachings appeared to the Buddha to be based on

logic and facts.

33. But he did not accept everything which Kapila taught. Only three things did the Buddha

accept from Kapila.

34. He accepted that reality must rest on proof. Thinking must be based on rationalism.

35. He accepted that there was no logical or factual basis for the presumption that God exists

or that he created the universe.

36. He accepted that there was Dukha (suffering) in the world.

37. The rest of Kapila's teachings he just bypassed as being irrelevant for his purpose.

(see page 83 to 87 Dr. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR WRITING AND SPEECH Vol. 2 THE BUDDHA AND HIS DHAMMA INTRODUCTION First Edition October 1992 THE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT GOVT.OF MAHARASHTRA)

Kapil contributed in Buddha's life significantly. So here question came WHY? It's because he was shaiv.

AMBEDKAR has many problems with established BUDDHISM

He himself asked ,'' Is it not necessary that these problems should be

solved and the path for the understanding of Buddhism be made clear? Is it not time that

those who are Buddhists should take up these problems at least for general discussion and

throw what light they can on these problems ?''

He writes ,''With a view to raise a discussion on these problems I propose to set them out here. The

first problem relates to the main event in the life of the Buddha, namely, Parivraja. Why did

the Buddha take Parivraja? The traditional answer is that he took Parivraja because he saw a

dead person, a sick person and an old person. This answer is absurd on the face of it. The

Buddha took Parivraja at the age of 29. If he took Parivraja as a result of these three sights,

how is it he did not see these three sights earlier? These are common events occurring by

hundreds and the Buddha could not have failed to come across them earlier. It is impossible

to accept the traditional explanation that this was the first time he saw them. The explanation

is not plausible and does not appeal to reason. But if this is not the answer to the question,

what is the real answer?

The second problem is created by the four Aryan Truths. Do they form part of the

original teachings of the Buddha ? This formula cuts at the root of Buddhism. If life is

sorrow, death is sorrow and rebirth is sorrow, then there is an end of everything. Neither

religion nor philosophy can help a man to achieve happiness in the world. If there is no

escape from sorrow, then what can religion do, what can Buddha do to relieve man from such

sorrow which is ever there in birth itself? The four Aryan Truths are a great stumbling block

in the way of non-Buddhists accepting the gospel of Buddhism. For the four Aryan Truths

deny hope to man. The four Aryan Truths make the gospel of the Buddha a gospel of

pessimism. Do they form part of the original gospel or are they a later accretion by the monks

The third problem relates to the doctrines of soul, of karma and rebirth. The Buddha

denied the existence of the soul. But he is also said to have affirmed the doctrine of karma

and rebirth. At once a question arises. If there is no soul, how can there be karma? If there is

no soul, how can there be rebirth ? These are baffling questions. In what sense did the

Buddha use the words karma and rebirth ? Did he use them in a different sense than the sense

in which they were used by the Brahmins of his day? If so, in what sense? Did he use them in

the same sense in which the Brahmins used them ? If so, is there not a terrible contradiction

between the denial of the soul and the affirmation of karma and rebirth? This contradiction

needs to be resolved.

The fourth problem relates to the Bhikkhu. What was the object of the Buddha in

creating the Bhikkhu ? Was the object to create a perfect man ? Or was his object to create a

social servant devoting his life to service of the people and being their friend, guide and

philosopher? This is a very real question. On it depends the future of Buddhism. If the

Bhikkhu is only a perfect man he is of no use to the propagation of Buddhism because though

a perfect man he is a selfish man. If, on the other hand, he is a social servant he may prove to

be the hope of Buddhism. This question must be decided not so much in the interest of

doctrinal consistency but in the interest of the future of Buddhism.

If I may say so, the pages of the journal of the Mahabodhi Society make, to me at any

rate, dull reading. This is not because the material presented is not interesting and instructive.

The dullness is due to the fact that it seems to fall upon a passive set of readers. After reading

an article, one likes to know what the reader of the journal has to say about it. But the reader

never gives out his reaction. This silence on the part of the reader is a great discouragement to

the writer. I hope my questions will excite the readers to come and make their contribution to

their solution.(see Dr. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR WRITING AND SPEECH Vol. 2 THE BUDDHA AND HIS DHAMMA INTRODUCTION First Edition October 1992 THE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT GOVT.OF MAHARASHTRA)

It means Ambedkar was not convinced about that Buddha left the palace after seeing three sorrows and he also didn’t like mythification of Buddha in various school. Some school specially Tibetan worshipped Buddha as god and Ambedkar was not ready for it.

Secondly he was not agreed with four noble truths . WHY? Let's discuss step by step .

According to Buddha life is full of sorrow. It was his first noble truth .

From childhood the life of Ambedkar was full of sorrow and his co-brothers in villages were working in villages without any payment and doing dirty jobs. They were considered as untouchables and no savarna touch them. Brahmins were so fanatic that they avoid touch of their shadow also. All untouchables were slaved and their women were raped day and night. For 1800 years untouchables were living with social sorrows so Ambedkar didn't want spiritual sorrows or any kind of sorrows more .They were useless for him. He want positivism so he criticized first noble truth.

But denying was not enough. He has to provide logical reason for Parivraja. From the beginning he was obsessed with water because in villages untouchables were / are not allowed to drink water by savarna on their wells or ponds or rivers. So he provided that cause for Parivraja of Buddha. It's kind of waterification of BUDDHA.

Thirdly all these schools believed rebirth which was problem for Ambedkar He was the rationalist and consistently denying soul and rebirth . Naturally he denied soul and rebirth theory and added that BUDDHA didn't give it . Vivekananda asked same question to Buddhist,'' If there is no soul, how can there be rebirth? If there is no soul, how can there be karmfal ? Who is carrying Karmsanskar to next birth ? '' Shankaracharya did same and defeated BUDDHIST ACHARYAS . Ambedkar didn't want this question again because question itself is logical and Buddhist explaination about it is very weak. So Ambedkar has to do something about it . Either deny it or accept it .He denied it.

But yet question remains because Buddha is approving it himself. On one level he has to simply cut off the root of question : THE THEORY of REBIRTH AND KARMA THEORY and have to give explaination why Buddha is talking and approving it? . Here also he has to give explaination of presence of this theory in Buddha's discourse . He flatly refused it's authority and assignation to Buddha and used counter technique of Vediks. Vediks destroyed opponents by adding and pirating their original text. Ambedkar used it as weapon against traditional Buddhist and claimed that it's also not said by BUDDHA. It's pirated.

Now question remains. Why Ambedkar did it? First of all he sincerely thought it illogical and irrational and secondly he didn’t believe rebirth because he thought that Brahmins have created it to exploit non-Brahmins. Naturally he declined rebirth theory in Buddhist Yans and relate it to logic given above.

After solving three problems next question arose in his mind. After an entry of 7 cr of untouchables in Boudh Dhamm what will be there role? Will they chase abstract mahanirwan or they will chase the said target'' liberty, equality and fraternity for all'' . For Babasaheb social agenda was priority and for that he has to change SANGH STRUCTURE of Buddhism. So he introduced new social Bhikkhu whose social commitment was more stronger than attaining MAHANIRWAN. As he said above his Bhikhu is SOCIAL SERVANT .Where from this concept came?

Probably it came from Leningrad University via Comrade Dharmananda Damodar Kosambi which wanted stalinist form of comradeship and Ambedkar transformed it in form of COMRADE BUDDHIST BHIKHKHU who worked for liberty, equality and fraternity for all. Another reason is also complicated one . He knew that there is some truth in BUDDHUSIT Answer . According to Buddhism Savarna were exploiting UNTOUCHABLES because of TRUSHNAS. Why trushnas are working in their hand ? BUDDHIST answer was Adynan /Ignorance was root cause of sorrow and Knowledge is the only remedy of it. It means an enlightenment of masses is necessary and for that enlightenment project devoted and loyal workers were necessary.

How can we see it?

Either We can say that he has twisted according to his sansakars

We can see it as another creation of ''SAMAJ'' began from Rajaram Mohan Roy. I think second one is right. He twisted Buddha because he wanted to put social agenda as priority. SO WE CAN SAY THAT HE SAMAJIFIED BUDDHA RELIGION..

Surprisingly nobody gave answers to his logical questions . Probably they thought that instead of debating it is better to convert 7 cr untouchables first. Right now his questions aren't troubling but one day or another day they are going to create great debate because his question has potential to change and challenge the traditional set-up of Buddhist Religion. It's going to raise question who's Buddha is true ? Ambedkar's Budha or Pittaka's Buddha ? Right now nobody is sensing it but it will appear in future . So Ambedkar raised questions in HINDUISM before death and now in 21 st century after death he will raise questions in Buddhism.. In real sense it's NAVYAN NEW AGAM CHALLENGING AGAM.

IN MEOMERY OF BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR 10 NOTES ON SRUSHTIYATA AND INDIAN ENLIGHTENMENT 30th Nov to 8th Dec

SHRIDHAR TILVE-NAIK NAVYAN AGAM V/S NIGAM

BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR: THE PROPHET WHO WAS NEVER EXPECTED part 3

According to Ambedkar all these traditional yanas are illogical and irrational. Traditional yanas were not at all social movement. They had not any social political agenda Some extreme scholars believed that like Jainism , Buddhism also firmly believed that only one born in the Brahmins and Kshatriya varna was qualified for attainment of nirvan. According to them it is misleading to speak of Buddha as a democrat or even as a social reformer. According to them Buddha was not at all interested in social custom and social sorrows. Buddha was not thinking about sorrow which emerged from social injustice. As he and his monk has renounced the world The sorrow of world didn’t matter for them. In traditional language Buddha was preaching equality only in matter of Moksh not about dharma arth and Kaam.

Ambedkar didn’t believe this hypothesis. He believed that social cause was responsible for Buddha’s renouncement . He wanted to solve social problem and that is why he went to Meditate on this problem. His Dhamma was the solution for social problem and Buddha was the pioneer of equality.

For that he wanted rational Buddha and rational influence also. Here Ambedkar encountered Shaivism. I have already proved that KAPILA was part of SHAIV darshan. BUDDHA was born and brought up in Kapilvastu. In search of rational influence Ambedkar reached to Kapila.