The recent parliamentary uproar over Home Minister Amit Shah’s remarks on Dr. BR Ambedkar has reignited debates about Babasaheb’s legacy. Congress leader Jairam Ramesh claimed that BJP and RSS leaders harbor animosity toward Ambedkar, asserting that their ideological predecessors even burned his effigies. Let’s explore the historical context and examine the statements made by key figures from the right-wing about Ambedkar and the Indian Constitution.
Amit Shah’s Remarks and Congress’s Retort
In a recent Rajya Sabha session, Amit Shah remarked, “It has become a fashion to say Ambedkar repeatedly. If they had taken God’s name this many times, they’d have a place in heaven.” He added that Ambedkar resigned from Nehru’s Cabinet because he felt ignored and dissatisfied.
Responding, Jairam Ramesh tweeted that BJP and RSS leaders have always harbored disdain for Ambedkar. “These are the same people whose predecessors burnt effigies of Babasaheb and wanted to alter the Constitution he framed,” Ramesh stated. But is there historical evidence to back this claim?
Historical Incident: RSS Workers Burning Ambedkar’s Effigy
Indeed, historical records indicate that RSS workers burned effigies of Dr. Ambedkar on December 12, 1949, in protest against the Hindu Code Bill, a legislative measure aimed at reforming Hindu personal laws, including marriage, succession, and women’s rights.
Renowned historian Ramachandra Guha, in India After Gandhi, recounts how the RSS organized a public meeting on December 11, 1949, at Delhi’s Ramlila Maidan. There, speakers vehemently opposed the Hindu Code Bill, calling it “an atom bomb on Hindu society.” The next day, RSS workers protested near the Assembly, chanting slogans like “Down with the Hindu Code Bill,” burning effigies of Ambedkar and Jawaharlal Nehru, and vandalizing Sheikh Abdullah’s car.
Why Did the Right-Wing Oppose the Hindu Code Bill?
The Hindu Code Bill sought to challenge entrenched societal inequalities, a goal that Ambedkar fervently supported. However, right-wing ideologues, including factions within the Congress, perceived it as an attack on traditional Hindu values.
The RSS’s mouthpiece, Organiser, published scathing critiques of the Bill. A November 2, 1949, article labeled it “a direct invasion on the faith of Hindus.” Another editorial described provisions like empowering women to divorce as “revolting to Hindu ideology.” The right-wing’s opposition was so staunch that they likened Ambedkar and Nehru to forces undermining Indian society.
RSS and Golwalkar’s Views on the Indian Constitution
The Indian Constitution, primarily drafted by Ambedkar, faced criticism from RSS leaders. MS Golwalkar, in his book Bunch of Thoughts, dismissed the Constitution as a “hotchpotch” of borrowed principles from Western democracies. He lamented its lack of references to India’s “national mission” or cultural heritage.
Similarly, VD Savarkar, a prominent right-wing ideologue, advocated for Manusmriti as the ideal legal framework for India. In Women in Manusmriti, Savarkar hailed it as “the most worshipable scripture after the Vedas” and a foundational text for Hindu society. He criticized the Constitution for lacking indigenous values, calling it unrepresentative of India’s cultural ethos.
Ambedkar’s Vision: Equality and Social Reform
Ambedkar resigned as Law Minister in 1951, partly due to delays in passing the Hindu Code Bill. He famously stated, “To leave inequality untouched and legislate on economic problems is to build a palace on a dung heap.” For Ambedkar, social reform was inseparable from nation-building, a vision often at odds with conservative forces of the time.
Conclusion: A Legacy Still Contested
The ideological battle over Ambedkar’s legacy underscores the ongoing struggle between progressive and conservative forces in India. While Amit Shah’s comments have sparked political debate, the historical record reveals that Ambedkar’s fight for equality faced opposition from various quarters, including the RSS.
Understanding these historical nuances is crucial in appreciating Ambedkar’s transformative contributions to Indian democracy and social justice