SR Darapuri I.P.S.(Retd.)
(Asian independent) Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, a prominent Indian social reformer, jurist, and the principal architect of the Indian Constitution, was deeply critical of Hinduism’s philosophical foundations. In works like *Philosophy of Hinduism* (part of his unfinished *Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches* series), *Riddles in Hinduism*, and *Annihilation of Caste*, he systematically “put Hinduism on trial” as a way of life, evaluating it through the lenses of social utility (community benefit) and individual justice (personal rights), alongside the French Revolution’s ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity. He argued that Hinduism, far from promoting moral progress or social harmony, entrenched inequality and served the interests of the Brahmin caste, rendering it incompatible with reason, science, and human dignity. This critique culminated in his conversion to Buddhism in 1956, which he saw as a rational alternative emphasizing equality and compassion.
Core Philosophical Critiques
Ambedkar’s views centered on Hinduism’s failure to evolve through “revolutions” (like those of Copernicus or Darwin) that rid religion of irrationality and advance society from “savage” to “civilized” states. He defined philosophy of religion as both descriptive (its teachings) and normative (critical assessment of those teachings for moral governance). Key arguments include:
Sanctification of Inequality via Chaturvarnya (Caste System): Hinduism’s core doctrine of the fourfold varna system (Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, Shudras) philosophically justifies hierarchy as divinely ordained, denying equality and liberty. Scriptures like the *Manusmriti* enshrine Brahmin supremacy in knowledge, wealth, and rights, while condemning Shudras to servitude, denying them Vedic access, and imposing unequal punishments (e.g., lighter fines for Brahmins abusing others). Untouchables (outside the varnas) face total ostracism as “Unseeables” or “Unapproachables,” perpetuating marginalization. Ambedkar likened this to a “fascist ideology” akin to Nazism, breeding supermen (Brahmins) at the expense of the weak, with no room for fraternity—only jealousy and division that weakened Hindu society against invasions.
Absurdities and Moral Bankruptcy of Scriptures: Ambedkar dismissed the Vedas as “worthless” and non-infallible, filled with immorality like incest, violence, animal sacrifices, black magic, and soma-induced intoxication—hardly divine revelations but tools for priestly control. The Upanishads contradict the Vedas, originally rejecting them before being co-opted. The “Bhagavad Gita” (“Manu in a nutshell”) was, in his view, composed to counter Buddha’s anti-caste revolution, promoting duty-bound inequality over ethical reform. Foundational myths, such as those of Rama and Krishna, were not ideals but exposés of patriarchal violence and moral flaws, used to uphold Brahminic dominance.
Brahmaism and the Illusion of Unity: The philosophical concept of Brahmaism—that all existence is the essence of Brahma—implies universal equality and fraternity, superior even to mere brotherhood. Yet, Ambedkar argued, Brahmins hypocritically subverted it to justify caste and gender hierarchies, preventing true social democracy. Gods like Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva embody this instability: locked in feuds, rising and falling in prominence (e.g., Indra demoted, Shiva elevated from a “thief-king”), with avatars and Trimurti concepts revealing sectarian propaganda rather than eternal truth.
Rejection of Reason and Moral Autonomy: Hinduism demands blind faith in arbitrary commands, stripping moral life of freedom and reason (prajna). It sanctifies poverty, superstition, and supernaturalism while enforcing unjust laws favouring one class. Concepts like “ahimsa” (non-violence) were inconsistently applied—shifting from Vedic meat-eating to vegetarianism, then back via Tantric rituals—serving Brahmin control, not ethics. The Kali Yuga was endlessly prolonged to excuse immorality and manipulate rulers.
Why He Renounced Hinduism
Ambedkar saw no scope for reform within Hinduism, as its philosophy was inherently anti-egalitarian and anti-rational, choking the “missionary spirit” of equality. Buddhism, by contrast, aligned with liberty (no god-imposed fate), equality (“samata”, rejecting caste), and fraternity (“karuna” compassion), grounded in reason and science without soul, afterlife, or inequality. His goal was not mere critique but enlightenment: to provoke Hindus toward rational self-examination and dismantle Brahmanic “deception” for a just society.
click on the link below to download ‘The Asian Independent App’
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=in.yourhost.theasianindependent
