INFOKARA RESEARCH ISSN NO: 1021-9056

GANDHIAN VIEWS TOWARDS THE DEPRESSED CLASS PEOPLE’S PROBLEMS

K.KALAI SELVI Ph.D - Full Time Research Scholars Department of History – Kamaraj College , Thoothukudi. (Affiliated by Manonmaniam Sundaranar University – )

At the beginning of the Non-cooperation movement the removal of and uplift of the Depressed Classes got a place of prominence in the program me of struggle for or self-government not only because of Mahatma ’s commitment to social reform but also because of a compulsion to bring the non-Brahmins and Depressed Classes into the fold of nationalist movement. As non-Brahmins had opposed the Home Rule movement in Madras and Bombay Presidencies and influential sections of the Depressed Classes had developed a tendency to keep aloof from the Congress and the mainstream of socio- political movement and some of them even thought of conversion to other religions like Christianity, an attempt to bring the non-Brahmins and Depressed Classes into the fold of the nationalist movement was felt by the nationalist leaders to be an imperative necessity. That is why the Congress session at adopted the following resolution, drafted by Gandhi, and moved by C.R. Das: “………….. in as much as the movement of Non-cooperation can only succeed by complete cooperation amongst the people themselves, this Congress calls upon the public associations to advance Hindu – Muslim unity and the Hindu delegates of this Congress to call upon the leading to settle all disputes between Brahmins and non-Brahmins, wherever they may be existing and to make a special effort to rid of the reproach of untouchability and respectfully urges the religious heads to help the growing desire to reform Hinduism in the matter of its treatment of the suppressed classes”.

Gandhi appealed to the Depressed Classes not to seek government assistance for their uplift, because “by seeking Government aid they will be used for suppressing their kith and kin and instead of being sinned against, they will themselves be the sinners”. He also advised them against rejection of Hinduism and “wholesale conversion to Islam or Christianity”, because untouchability was “no part of Hinduism”, but a mere “excrescence” which “an army of Hindu reformers” were bent upon removing. Gandhi advised them to remain within Hinduism, protest against untouchability in a disciplined, and intelligent manner and join the Non-cooperation movement. As Congress was trying to bring about a change in the attitude of Hindus towards the untouchables, he hoped that if the Depressed Classes joined the Non-cooperation movement,

Volume 9 Issue 2 2020 116 http://infokara.com/ INFOKARA RESEARCH ISSN NO: 1021-9056

through that movement itself the problem of untouchability would be solved: “When Swaraj is established by the method of Non cooperation …. there will be no pariah or non-Brahmin problem left to be solved.

As an individual with religious and humanitarian outlook, although Gandhi was born in an orthodox Vaishnava family and his mother forbade him not to touch the family scavenger Uka, Gandhi owed her sympathy for the untouchables, as he claimed, not to western education or study of scriptures but to the influence of the Vaishnava community to which he belonged. He said; “My concern for Antyajas is a credit to my devotion to the Vaishnava way of life, that is an expression of pure compassion.

Gandhi’s experience about the treatment of Indians by the White Europeans in South Africa most probably contributed to his sympathy for untouchables, as once he observed: “those who wanted to see the condition of untouchable Indians should go to South Africa and realise what untouchability meant”. On return from South Africa founded in 1915 Satygraha Ashram which, along with other objectives, aimed at the removal of untouchability. In this Ashram there were untouchable inmates and an untouchable girl, named Laxmi was adopted by Gandhi as daughter8.

Gandhi attached importance to the removal of untouchability both from religious as well as political points of view.

From religious point of view he considered it necessary to eradicate untouchability for reforming Hindu religion to which he professed deep attachment. To him there was no sanction for untouchability in Hindu religion. He considered it quite contrary to the spirit of Hinduism. He said; “Untouchability in its extreme form has always caused me so much pain because I consider myself to be a Hindu of Hindus saturated with the spirit of Hinduism. I have failed to find a single warrant for the existence of untouchability as we believe and practise it today in all those books which we call as Hindu Shastras”. He considered untouchability to be an unhealthy custom, ‘a blot’ on Hinduism, and ‘an excrescence’.

While seeking to remove untouchability Gandhi tried his best to remain within the framework of Hindu religion and tradition. He progressed firm belief in the system, which, according to him, was based on equality of the four Varnas. He wanted to integrate the untouchables as Shudras into the Varna system. Initially Gandhi did not think necessary to undermine caste system for the removal of untouchability.

It may be pointed out here that Gandhi could not always defend his anti untouchability stand on the basis of the Hindu Shastras and that though he was invoking religion to oppose untouchability he was actually propelled by liberal humanism. During his disappointing discussion with the Nambudri trustee of the temple, when the latter insisted that untouchability was sanctioned by the Shastras, the former told the latter; “…. do not tie yourself down to some authority or some book which cannot be defended by reason. I ask you

Volume 9 Issue 2 2020 117 http://infokara.com/ INFOKARA RESEARCH ISSN NO: 1021-9056

therefore to adduce reason and do not appeal to authority or custom”. Earlier he had also questioned the authority of the Shastras in these words:

Untouchability is not a sanction of religion, it is a device of satan. The devil has always quoted scriptures. But scriptures cannot transcend reason and truth. He also tried to establish his view that the practice of untouchability was not consistent with the spirit of Shastras. He said: “For me the Vedas are divine and unwritten ‘The letter killeth’. It is the spirit that give the light. And the spirit of the Vedas is purity, truth, innocence, chastity, humanity, simplicity, forgiveness, godliness and all that makes a man or women noble and brave. Evidently Gandhi could not overcome the dilemma between the authority of Shastras and reason for which he wisely avoided discussion on the exegesis of religious texts with conservative upholders of untouchability like Shankaracharya and some Hindu Pandits. One R. Krishnaswami Aiyar wrote to Gandhi, quoting certain passages from texts like Manu Smriti, Gautama Dharmashastra, Vyaghrapada, Brihaspati and Baudhayana, which upheld the practice of untouchability. Gandhi replied, Do we treat the ‘untouchable’ Panchamas as we treat our mothers and sisters whilst they are untouchable? I still confess my literary ignorance of the Shastras, but I do profess to understand the secret of Hinduism. And I venture to say in all humility but all the strength I can command, that to perpetuate untouchability in the manner we have done is a serious blot on Hinduism, an unwarranted abuse of the Smritis and a negation of love which is the basis of Hinduism. I therefore do not hesitate to call ‘untouchability’ as practiced today a satanic activity, I invite Mr. Aiyar to devote the talents God has given him to the service of the outcastes among his countrymen, and I promise him that he will see the meaning of life I see in the Hindu Shastras. In 1927, while reacting to a statement from a non-Brahmin friend that without destruction of Varna untouchability could not be destroyed, Gandhi said, “…. if Varnashrama goes to the dogs in the removal of untouchability I shall not shed a tear. But all along he remained a believer in Varnashram. In 1935 he pronounced his verdict against caste on the ground that it violated Varnashram in two ways: Varnasharm was not opposed to intermarriage and interdining which caste system did not allow; Varnashrama upheld hereditary occupation while caste system tolerated “anarchy about choice of occupation”.

Gandhi wanted removal of untouchability to ensure social equality and justice for the weaker sections of the society, which he considered “an indispensable condition” for Swaraj. He defined Swaraj in these words: “Swaraj for me means freedom for the meanest of our countrymen. If the lot of Panchama is not improved, when we are all suffering, it is not likely to be better under the intoxication of Swaraj…. I am not interested in freeing India from merely English Yoke. I am bent on freeing India from any yoke whatsoever. I have no desire to exchange King Log for King Stork. Hence for me the movement of Swaraj is a movement of self purification”. By removing untouchability Gandhi hoped to make the untouchables active participants in freedom struggle, who would otherwise be used by the “unscrupulous” government to oppose the forces of

Volume 9 Issue 2 2020 118 http://infokara.com/ INFOKARA RESEARCH ISSN NO: 1021-9056

nationalism. Through removal of untouchability Gandhi wanted to promote cohesion and even solve Brahmin-Non Brahmin problem which was a major hindrance to nationalist movement in South India. Referring to the Brahmin-Non-Brahmin problem Gandhi observed in a public meeting at Tinnevelly on 7 October, 1927: “….. after all the Brahmin-Non-Brahmin question also resolves itself into one of untouchability. And he who will successfully kill this cobra of untouchability will have laid the axe at the root of the Brahmin-Non Brahmin question. For it is my clear conviction that it is this curse of untouchability which has crept into Hinduism and has poisoned Hinduism itself ….. The basis of untouchability is an arrogant assumption of superiority of one class over another, and once we have successfully dealt with the hydra-headed monster of superiority, I think, we have very little to fight about. I therefore invite you all to join me in this crusade against untouchability in every form.

Gandhi sought to remove untouchability basically by a change of caste Hindus’ attitude towards the so-called untouchables, i.e. the former should give up the notion of pollution by touch and feeling of superiority and inferiority attaching to birth. Gandhi thought that if the notion of defilement by touch was removed, the Depressed Classes would be able to enjoy their civic rights such as access to roads, wells and public institutions and utilities on terms of equality. This change of attitude, he thought, could be brought about by the social reformers through “well-ordered and persistent agitation”, and by “patient argument and correct conduct”, and not through force or violence. Gandhi was however not opposed to any non-violent attempt on the part of the Depressed Classes to secure their legitimate rights. He supported the Vaikom in to secure to the untouchable and unapproachable the right to use roads in proximity to the temple, and the non-violent Satyagraha of Ambedkar to secure to the untouchables the right to use the water of the Mahad Chaudar tank which had been declared a public tank according to a legislation passed in Bombay Legislative Council. But he disapproved the attempts of impatient untouchables to enter temples by force. He told them that the removal of untouchability was ‘a sacred cause’ which could never be served by ‘bruteforce’ or ‘satan’s methods. He told them that they could not see God by force and that God was present within their hearts and not in temples and mosques. He advised them to pray to God and patiently wait till the change of heart among the caste Hindus.

Gandhi did not insist upon inter-caste dinner or marriage for removal of untouchability. Initially he saw no contradiction between caste system and untouchability. Obviously he did not want to hurt the orthodox by advocating radical measures.

Gandhi felt the necessity of supplementing anti-untouchability movement by welfare measures like erection of model schools and temples and digging of wells, “specially designed for the convenience of untouchables”, because “after the theoretical removal of untouchability if no special effort was made, the vast

Volume 9 Issue 2 2020 119 http://infokara.com/ INFOKARA RESEARCH ISSN NO: 1021-9056

bulk of them (Depressed Classes) would not readily take advantage of the removal. He regarded the problem of the uplift of the Depressed Classes as essentially a social problem; he did not believe in the efficacy of legal or constitutional safeguards for that purpose. He said, “I am unconcerned with the question, what place untouchables will have in any political constitution that may be drawn up. Every one of the artificial props that may be set up in the constitution will be broken to beats, if we Hindus do not wish to play the game. The reasoning I have given against separate electorates and against separate treatment is equally applicable in the case of untouchables. This removal of untouchability is not to be brought about by any legal enactment. It will only be brought about, when the Hindu conscience is roused to action and of its own accord removes the shame. It is a duty that the touchables owe to untouchables”.

From the very beginning of the Non-cooperation movement Gandhi tried to translate his anti- untouchability ideas into action. On 31 October, 1920 under the presidentship of Gandhi the senate of resolved that the untouchables would not be excluded from any school, approved by the Vidyapith, and “that no school which excludes Antyajas will be recognized. There was great pressure on Gandhi at Ahmedabad and Bombay for the withdrawal of this resolution, to which he did not yield. Gandhi incorporated the removal of untouchability in the Non-cooperation resolution of the Congress in the face of great opposition from the orthodox Hindus. The Ahmedabad session of the Congress held in December 1921 required every Hindu Congressman to take the following pledge. “As a Hindu I believe in the justice and necessity of removing the evil of untouchability and shall on all possible occasions seek personal contact with, and endeavor to render service t the submerged class”. In this session an attempt was made to give respectability to the untouchable Bhangi castes’ sanitation work by entrusting maintenance of trench privies to volunteers who did this work of their own free choice. After this session Gandhi wrote in on 5 January, 1922; “The work of attending to the trenches was done not by paid Bhangis but by unpaid volunteers belonging to all castes and religions.

During the Non-cooperation movement there was a temporary but spectacular demonstration of anti- untouchability feelings. In some places the untouchables were even admitted into the premise of Brahmins to do the same service which other castes were doing. But in most cases there was a lack of sincerity among non- Congressmen as well as Congressmen in attempts to remove untouchability; they did not subscribe to Gandhi’s view that Swaraj was not worth-attaining or impossible to attain without removal of untouchability. Even in Gujarat, Gandhi’s own province, “not a single school was ready to admit children’s of Dheds or Bhangis”. Bahishkrit Bharat, a Depressed Class mouth piece of Nagpur made the following observation on the failure of Gandhi’s attempts to remove untouchability: “Mahatma Gandhi tried hard to remove untouchability, but received no practical support from his adherents. As a matter of fact none expected that they would ever improve the lot of their down trodden brethren”.

Volume 9 Issue 2 2020 120 http://infokara.com/ INFOKARA RESEARCH ISSN NO: 1021-9056

After the suspension of Non-cooperation movement the Congress Working Committee in its meeting at Lucknow held in June 1922 constituted a sub-committee “to formulate a scheme embodying practical measures for bettering the condition of the so-called untouchables throughout the country”. This sub- committee was chaired by Swami Shraddhananda, the leader. But after some time Swami Shraddhananda resigned from this sub-committee on the ground that the question of untouchability had been relegated to an obscure corner”. Thereafter the Congress Working Committee requested the All-India to take up the issue of removal of untouchability as it concerned the Hindu community.

There was a softening of anti-untouchability stand in the Belgaum session of Congress, presided over by Gandhi himself in 1924. Earlier the Working Committee had recommended to the subjects committee that Congress would not “regard any such institution to be national which does not actively encourage Hindu- Muslim unity and which excludes untouchables, which does not make hand spinning and carding compulsory, and in which students and teachers do not habitually wear khaddar”. The resolution was modified as “The Congress does not regard any such institution to be national which does not Actively encourage Hindu-Muslim unity, education among untouchables and removal of untouchability”. The Belgaum congress however passed a resolution, urging Hindu members of all Congress organizations ‘to devote greater attention to the amelioration of the lot of the depressed classes by ascertaining their wants such as in regard to wells, places of worship, facilities for education etc. and making provision for meeting such wants.

Early in 1924 Gandhi had got interested in the . Vaikom was a village in the princely state of where the caste Hindu Congressmen, Syrian Orthodox Christians as well as Depressed Class volunteers were carrying on Satyagraha to secure to the unapproachable castes like , Pulayas and Shanars the right to use roads in proximity to the temple. Gandhi felt impressed by the disciplined conduct of the Satygrahis. The Belguam Congress congratulated them for their “non-violence, patience, courage and endurance”. Gandhi visited Travancore in March, 1925 and spent a month there. His presence facilitated a settlement. Consequently the Satyagrahis lifted barricades and roads on three sides of the temple were declared open for the untouchables.

Gandhi regarded the Vaikom Satyagraha as “a battle of no less consequence than that of Swaraj” as it demonstrated the success of the technique of non-violent agitation in fighting “an age-long wrong and prejudice”, and securing social justice to the untouchables.

In 1927, when some correspondent asked Gandhi to give his opinion about the Satyagraha of Ambedkaries to use the water of the Chowdar tank of Mahad, he congratulated the Mahad Satyagrahis who were untouchables for having “brought the question a step nearer to solution by their exemplary self-restraint

Volume 9 Issue 2 2020 121 http://infokara.com/ INFOKARA RESEARCH ISSN NO: 1021-9056

under most provoking circumstances’. “Had they retaliated”, he observed, “it would have been perhaps difficult to distribute the blame”.

In March-April, 1930 the untouchable Satyagrahis, who were the followers of Ambedkar started agitation to enter into the Kalaram temple of Nasik. This agitation resulted in a violent conflict between the untouchable Satyagrahis and caste Hindu rowdies on 9 April, 1929, the day of chariot festival in the temple. Commenting on this Satyagraha Gandhi criticized the Government policy of not opposing the powerful conservative elements; he also disapproved the method of the untouchable agitators in the following words: “I have advised them and I repeat the advice that it is wholly unnecessary for them to seek to force entry into the orthodox temples eventhough the method of Satyiagraha. It is the duty of the ‘touchable’ Hindus to secure for the untouchables the freedom of the temples”.

In 1929, on the basis of 1928 Calcutta Congress resolution the Congress Working Committee created a separate committee with Madan Mohan Malaviya as President and as Secreary, whose office was located in Bombay to work for removal of untouchability. This Committee was created as Gandhi felt that it was not possible for Congress being a political body to take full responsibility for social work. The following were the objectives of the anti-untouchability committee

set up by the Congress:

(1) to get public temples thrown open to the Antyajas

(2) to secure for the Antyajas the use of public wells

(3) the removal of restrictions which Antyaja children faced in public schools.

(4) to improve their condition in respect of cleanliness

(5) to induce them to give up their habit of eating carrion and taking liquor.

The work of this committee was confined to Bombay and Central Provinces. It was able to get fifteen temples declared open eleven in Central Provinces and Berar, three in Bombay Presidency, and one in U.P and twenty seven municipal wells were thrown open for the untouchables. The Congress Secretary in his report however claimed that this committee has been successful in breaking the exclusiveness of caste Hindus in some measure and making the Depressed Classes assertive of their rights.

After Gandhi – Irwin pact Gandhi wrote in Navajivan in March, 1931: “The rights of untouchables should not be compromised for grasping the fruits of Swaraj”. On 2 August, 1931 at a ceremony of opening Sir Chinubhai’s family temple for the Depressed Classes in Ahmadabad he gave them the epithet Harijan (man

Volume 9 Issue 2 2020 122 http://infokara.com/ INFOKARA RESEARCH ISSN NO: 1021-9056

of God) which had originally been coined by the Gujarati saint-poet Narsinha Mehta while calling the caste Hindus Durjan (man of evil). In September 1931, on the way to the second session of Round Table Conference Gandhi told a correspondent of New York Times: “No Swaraj Government could exist for twenty four hours which continued to uphold the principle of untouchability.

END NOTE :

.1. Young India, 27 October, 1920

2. CWMG, Vol. XX, p. 318-319, Navajivan (Gujarati), 3 July, 1921.

3. Quoted in Bhikhu Parekh, Colonialism, Tradition and Reform, (New Delhi, 1989) p. 221.

4. Young India, 27 April, 1921.

5. Harijan, 16 November, 1935.

6. The Hindu, 10 October, 1927

7. Indian Social Reformer, 2 January, 1921.

8. B.R. Ambedkar, What Congress and Gandhi Have Done to Untouchables, Bombay, 1945, p. 21.

9. Dhananjay Keer, Dr. Ambedkar: Life & Mission Bombay, 1962, p. 138.

10. The , Souverir, 1924, Allahabad, 1925, pp. 36-43.

Volume 9 Issue 2 2020 123 http://infokara.com/