Q: Was Indian president K. R. Narayanan denied entry in to a temple for being a Dalit?

K R Narayanan
(National leaders should be promoted as national leaders, not as Dalit Leaders. The following are two questions answered by an Ambedkrite thinker on the use of the word ‘dalit’)
Answer By – Shekhar Bodhakar

       No. President K.R. Narayanan (Kocheril Raman Narayanan was denied entry, not because he was a dalit, but because he was considered an Ati-Shudra (ex-untouchable) by the so called high caste Brahmins. The President too considered himself as an Ati-Shudra (Ati shudras were outside the varna system and treated as untouchables) and therefore didn’t mind the insult. Otherwise, he would have quoted from the Indian Constitution that it is anti constitutional and anti Indian to deny temple entry to another so called ‘Hindu’, the offence punishable with imprisonment

Shekhar Bodhakar

 A dalit is a continually oppressed /suppressed /downtrodden INDIVIDUAL, a victim and NOT a name for any particular GROUP of people. A Brahmin who is continually a victim of atrocities is a dalit. Most Shudra’s and Ati-Shudrs are dalits because they are continually suppressed by the Manuvadis.

The president wasn’t a dalit because he doesn’t fall in this definition of dalit. In fact, he was a privileged individual and doors of opportunities were opened for him which eventually led him to becoming the president of India. How is that oppression ? This President was certainly not downtrodden despite his Ati-Shudra status. This Ati-Shudra indirectly promoted Casteism by not raising his voice.

Those who consider themselves as Shudras or Ati Shudras should prevent themselves from becoming dalits (the victims) and should either stop going to temples to avoid being beaten


more wisely, simply stop falling in the trap of Manuvadi Brahmins who have, for their own selfish interest, very cleverly made them believe that they are Shudras and Ati Shudras.

Call the spade ‘a spade’. The Brahmin is called a Brahmin, so why should a person who believes in the varna system and falls in the Shudra /Ati-Shudra category not be referred to as a Shudra (or Ati shudra) instead of a dalit.


Another Personality who is often wrongly referred to as a dalit was one of the greatest humanitarian and social reformers the world has witnessed, Dr B.R. Ambedkar.

Question:- When will another Dalit leader like Dr. B.R. Ambedkar rise?

Answer:- Depends on your understanding of the word ‘dalit’, the answer to your question is NEVER.

Dr BR Ambedkar was a dalit who stopped being a dalit as soon as he could fight back. A dalit is a continually oppressed, suppressed, mentally crushed victim of atrocities. Dr Ambedkar could fight back only because he realised that:

  1. “Caste is a state of mind”. Casteism is a mental phenomena. Nobody has a caste and nobody belongs to a caste. People are MADE TO BELIEVE that they belong to or have a caste. Castes were forced on people for the benefit of the controllers, the Brahmins.
  2. THERE IS NO SUCH PHRASE AS “AN EDUCATED SHUDRA OR AN EDUCATED ATI-SHUDRA”. If a person thinks of himself as a Shudra /Ati Shudra, she/he is not supposed to get educated because thats how the role of a Shudra is defined as in the Brahmin ‘holy’ scriptures. It automatically follows that if a so called Shudra, who is sometimes wrongly termed as a dalit, gets educated then she/he is not a Shudra.

Instead of asking, “When will another DALIT leader like Dr. BR Ambedkar rise?” a more appropriate question would be: When will another LEADER like Dr. BR Ambedkar rise who could stop people from becoming dalits ? In this case you would get a different answer.

If a leader like Dr. BR Ambedkar arises, that person won’t be a Dalit (nor was Dr Ambedkar one). She/he would have to be a smart fighter who is not going to allow anyone to make him into a dalit, a victim of atrocities.

I hope that answers your question. The following is important information about whether the word ‘dalit’ should or should not be used to label the so called lower castes and the Ati shudras, the untouchables.

CAMPAIGN against the use of the word ‘dalit’ for scheduled castes (SC), scheduled tribes (ST) and other minorities

Should the word “dalit” be used or not? It really depends on who you are referring to when using that word. It can clearly be used in some cases, otherwise that word wouldn’t exist.

Regardless of what it means, it is wrong to use ANY other word to refer to people from STs, SCs, and OBCs (other than who they really are in the constitutional sense).

The following is just ONE of the reasons why Dr Ambedkar objected to Gandhi’s use of the word “Harijan”

By using ANY other word (whether harijan or dalit) for these people, you are simply re-labeling them as ‘untouchable’ . Treating someone as an untouchable is not only abusive, it is anti constitutional and is a hindrance to annihilation of caste and Gandhi knew that —Period.

Yes, the word “dalit” is foolishly, albeit unknowingly, casually used even by many ‘hardcore’ Ambedkarites when referring to STs and SCs as such. Many academians seem to mistakenly think that they need some term to refer to these people in order to give them a political identity and conveniently choose ‘dalit’, not realising that by doing so they may be doing more harm than good.

For the English speakers, to realise the abusive, derogatory and casteist nature of the use of the word ‘dalit’ when exclusively reserved to label a certain section of society, replace it with any of its English equivalents; broken, crushed depressed, suppressed, oppressed, downtrodden victims. Being referred to as a dalit is a constant reminder of ones past ensuring the stigma isn’t removed.

This must stop. Otherwise we fall into a very cleverly set trap that vehemently promotes Manuism (casteism), serving the Manuvadi Brahminivad agenda.

Until at least when we ourselves STOP REFERRING TO SCs and STs as dalits, the mainstream media will carry on with this neuro-linguistic brainwashing that promotes dalitism/harjanism/untouchablization.

The statement, “Dr Ambedkar fought for the rights of dalits” could be used.. AS LONG AS the listener understands that the word ‘DALIT” means:

” ANY oppressed and downtrodden PERSON, a victim who most likely would be a woman, minor, widow, divorcee, orphan, disabled person, labourer, a person from a SC, ST or any other oppressed minority group. Ie, NOT JUST FROM so called low castes. (A dalit could be a Brahmin who is unfairly suppressed)”. A dalit is not a person belonging to any particular group. A dalit is usually a casteless non-Brahmin made to believe she/he has a caste

ONLY if so, can we really say that Dr Ambedkar fought for the rghts of dalits.. ALL dalits. Not just for the rights of SCs, STs and OBCs.