Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.

Start by marking “Annihilation of Caste” as Want to Read:

Other editions

Enlarge cover

Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Open Preview

Annihilation of Caste

B.R. Ambedkar

4.57 · Rating details · 2,773 ratings · 293 reviews

“What the Communist Manifesto is to the capitalist world, Annihilation of Caste is to India.” —Anand Teltumbde, author of The Persistence of Caste

B.R. Ambedkar’s Annihilation of Caste is one of the most important, yet neglected, works of political writing from India. Written in 1936, it is an audacious denunciation of Hinduism and its caste system. Ambedkar – a figure like ...more

Get A Copy

Paperback, 100 pages

Published January 1st 2000 by Blumoon Books (first published May 1936)

More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about Annihilation of Caste, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

Social Justice And Political Safeguards For Depressed Classes by B.R. Ambedkar

read these books to know India, and help it grow with unity

16 books — 10 voters

The God of Small Things by Arundhati Roy

The India Reading List

459 books — 481 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30

Average rating 4.57 ·

Rating details

· 2,773 ratings · 293 reviews

More filters

Sort order

Start your review of Annihilation of Caste

Mar 30, 2014 Sumirti Singaravel rated it it was amazing

Recommends it for: All Indians especially the young ones.

Shelves: readings-worth-a-lifetime, favorites, india, small-and-beautiful, 6-stars, super-favorites, references, to-be-read-before-i-bid-adieu, non-fiction, favorite-authors

Annihilation of Caste is a prolific work by Dr. Ambedkar. It encapsulates the ideas of a rebel of how caste and religion oppresses people - socially, morally and economically. Originally conceived as a speech for Jat-Pat-Todak Mandal, an organization of Caste Hindu Social Reformers, it was later published by Ambedkar himself, for the organization refused to allow him to give his speech in the original form. Lucid, powerful and scholarly the treatise provides a thorough insight of how and why Annihilation of Caste is a prolific work by Dr. Ambedkar. It encapsulates the ideas of a rebel of how caste and religion oppresses people - socially, morally and economically. Originally conceived as a speech for Jat-Pat-Todak Mandal, an organization of Caste Hindu Social Reformers, it was later published by Ambedkar himself, for the organization refused to allow him to give his speech in the original form. Lucid, powerful and scholarly the treatise provides a thorough insight of how and why caste plagues the life of millions. There is an underlying indignation, fierce and untainted, rightfully directed towards years of unwarranted injustice.

The boon and the bane of Hinduism is the fact that both the philosophy and religion is so intricately weaved around its core faith. Although caste, a necessary adjustment by the society to keep the religion intact, has been objected by many other forerunners previously to Ambedkar, from Raja Ram Mohan Roy to Mahatma Gandhi, it has always sprung back with a rejuvenated force, for it derived its root from the fundamental philosophy of the Hinduism. What is more revolutionary and indomitably courageous about Ambedkar and this work is that he questions the very authority of the vedas, upanishads and manu smritis itself.

"There should be one and only one standard book of Hindu Religion, acceptable to all Hindus and recognized by all Hindus. This of course means that all other books of Hindu religion such as Vedas, Shastras, and Puranas, which are treated as sacred and authoritative, must by law cease to be so, and the preaching of any doctrine, religious or social, contained in these books should be penalized"

The mandal refused to allow an audience for Ambedkar's speech for the very reason that, "at least the word "Veda" be left out for the time being."

Citing and drawing parallels from history to western philosophy, from Plato to French Revolution, Ambedkar's argument dazzles and dares with objectivity and erudition.

Another important section in this book is his reply to the criticism of Gandhi to this work. Ambedkar spares no one, especially not Gandhi, and gives back a direct, logical and completely awe-inspiring reply. For instance, his reply to Gandhi's argument that everyone should follow his own ancestral calling according to his/her caste, Ambedkar flashes back with fervor:

"Does the Mahatma practise what he preaches? One does not like to make personal reference in an argument which is general in its application. But when one preaches a doctrine and holds it as a dogma, there is a curiosity to know how far he practises what he preaches......The Mahatma is a Bania by birth. His ancestors had abandoned trading in favour of ministership, which is a calling of the Brahmins. In his own life, before he became a Mahatma, when the occasion came for him to choose his career he preferred law to [a merchant's] scales. On abandoning law, he became half saint and half politician. He has never touched trading, which is his ancestral calling."

Caste in India still persist even in this 21st century. There are still interior rural hinterlands where Caste system prevails, much not exposed by the urban-centric media. Even the young minds are not without any prejudice(Check the twitter, Quora, Facebook for evidence. There are plenty out there with caste based name handles and tags attached to their identities).

I recommend this book to be read by every Indian, especially by every 'Hindu' and by all youngsters. It must question your perspectives and mindset on Indian society and Hinduism. If it does, then India is still in safe hands.

P.S: I do not recommend that edition of this book published with Arundhati Roy's 'Introduction'. Honestly, Ambedkar requires no Introduction at all.

P.S.S: Compliment reading this book along with Ambedkar's another significant work, originally a paper submitted at LSE, "Caste: Their genesis, origin and development' . ...more

flag 58 likes · Like · see review

Jul 03, 2019 William2 rated it really liked it · review of another edition

This is extraordinary. I have just finished Arundhati Roy’s The Doctor and the Saint, which is the introduction here, though I read it in its form as a separate publication. Now I’m reading Ambedkar whose clarity and cogency are fascinating. Caste has always been an enigma to me, specifically the Dalits. Why would a major religion have coreligionists who are considered, not only unequal to others, but literally foul: that is, embodiments of pollution? I did not know that the justification was ...more

flag 40 likes · Like · see review

Jan 07, 2011 Tisaranavamsa rated it it was amazing

Recommended to Tisaranavamsa by: Tanoj Meshram

I began reading this book with scepticism thinking that this is a work of an idologue but I was so mistaken to hold such a view. I have concluded that this is the most scholarly work I have ever read.

It was very much intellectually stimulating for me.

This book is for those who want to want to know how to put forth an opinion, how an ideal speech should be written, how to be objective but still stand firm against oppression & injustice. The most important reason is that it is an eye-opener ...more

flag 27 likes · Like · see review

Apr 05, 2014 S.Ach rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: politics, india, non-fiction, indian-author, favourites

The Doctor and The Saint

Arundhati Roy is a deadly butcher. Not a ruthless clumsy one. But like a seasoned assassin. She chooses her target carefully. Equips herself with unfailing arms and ammunition by hours and hours of stern research. And then she strikes. Relentlessly. Mercilessly. She strikes to kill. Kill the target in the eyes of the reader. Even if the target survives, the scars from the bruises remain forever.

This time the victim was - the most famous Indian in the world - Mohandas ...more

flag 23 likes · Like · see review

Jul 06, 2013 Justin Podur rated it it was amazing

Shelves: international-politics

I read Gandhi as a high school student, and liked him, but it was not until I read Ambedkar that I felt like I had really found something good. Ambedkar is clear, uncompromising, unadulterated. He was also incredibly prolific. This speech, which became a book, was too clear and too uncompromising to even be delivered. I read it more than 15 years ago and remember so many quotes - caste is a monster, you cannot have political reform, you cannot have economic reform, unless you slay that monster. ...more

flag 22 likes · Like · see review

Mar 09, 2018 Khush rated it it was amazing

I think it is a great book. Ambedkar tells us what is rotten in India. Being an 'Untouchable' himself, he knew the situation of lower castes inside out. Indian society is predominantly divided into four castes. Those at the top do work in fields such as education, business, law and so forth, while the lowest castes do the manual work, and then there are those who are without caste; their situation is the worst in Indian society. Even though a vast population is affected by the caste system, it
I think it is a great book. Ambedkar tells us what is rotten in India. Being an 'Untouchable' himself, he knew the situation of lower castes inside out. Indian society is predominantly divided into four castes. Those at the top do work in fields such as education, business, law and so forth, while the lowest castes do the manual work, and then there are those who are without caste; their situation is the worst in Indian society. Even though a vast population is affected by the caste system, it is difficult to fight it, or annihilate it as Ambedkar suggests. One reason for this is that those who belong to the upper castes do not want to give up their privileged position in society. Second reason is giving up caste means giving up Hinduism itself. Since 'caste' is sanctioned by the religious texts; not observing caste means rejecting Hinduism. In addition, the idea of 'karma' plays a vital role in the Indian imagination. It has a firm grip on an ordinary Indian mind. One can safely say that most people, irrespective of their caste, genuinely believe in 'karmic order' and in turn, have a firm belief in caste. One accepts one's lot, it does not matter where one is in the caste hierarchy, and this very conception strengthens caste.

What is so stunning about the book is that Ambedkar shames the upper castes with such vehemence, contempt and astute arguments that the upper caste reformists, possibly, cannot counter him in any reasonable way. I mean any normal thinking person will at once see the cruelty and cunning innate to such a system that has worked for over two centuries now. This is colonialism too, perhaps, even more lethal because it modernizes itself and stays relevant.

One perfectly understands Ambedkar rage against the Indian caste system. He quotes from various sources both literary and religious to bash the upper castes. His anger is largely directed at those Hindus who consider themselves not only atheists but also see themselves as social reformers. His chief opponent was Gandhi. When one looks at their correspondence, Ambedkar makes far more sense than Gandhi.

According to Arundhati Roy, who wrote a book-length introduction to this book, caste is the engine that runs India. It always did. She
sees Ambedkar as Doctor and Gandhi as Saint– most probably a fake one. In her essay, she shows how banal Gandhi was in his ways and what a hypocrite when it had to deal with the issue caste reforms; how his thoughts take different hue in the English press, and a quite different tone in the regional press. She delves into very real documents to make us see the 'real' Gandhi who developed from 'truth to truth' in his political career, as she pointedly observes. In contrast to Gandhi, Ambedkar is shown as far more honest and forthright in his political affiliations.

On my first reading of Roy about Ambedkar and Gandhi, I was disappointed in Gandhi and his hypocrisies. I still believe that everything that Roy wrote about him was true. But I also think that Gandhi, with all his quirks and peculiarities, cannot be so easily fixed. There is much more to him that has made him 'Gandhi.' Just like everyone else Gandhi was no god, he had his imperfections, and he did certain things that no politician, saint or otherwise, could have managed. He was the only one who provided the much-needed leadership to the vast Indian population which responded to him brushing aside differences that are intrinsic to a heterogeneous country like India. Gandhi, with his queer ideas concerning sexuality and sex, truly helped men and women to have equal, respectful and harmonious relations.

Gandhi was probably the only leader who worked so closely with 'Untouchables.' He was the product of his society and just like everyone around him, he practiced caste and had some funny or rather very subtle caste-based prejudices against 'Dalits' in his early years, but considering what he did with his life, it would be reckless to dismiss him. Gandhi worked with 'Dalits' and cleaned lavatories that no 'Brahmin' will do even in today's India. Gandhi used fasting and nonviolence all his life to fight injustice. When India got Independence, he wanted his country to be secular. There were many forces even then that wanted India to be a Hindu nation, but he firmly opposed it. Can we really call him a bigot? He was indeed a clever politician, and in order to be a politician in such a diversified country, it is not easy to appease everybody. He was bound to fail and stumble.

But I guess Gandhi succeeded in many ways, so did Ambedkar. And as long as there are writers like Roy in India, one can be sure that India will tame the monster of caste.

...more

flag 20 likes · Like · see review

Oct 08, 2019 Murtaza rated it really liked it

The caste system, only dimly understood outside the Indian subcontinent, is perhaps the most rigid form of hierarchical social organization in human history. Caste is something like a relic from ancient times and proves the close relationship between India and the hierarchical ancient Greek civilization — a relationship far more direct than that existing between the modern West and antiquity. This book consists of two major parts: a debate between Bhimrao Ambedkar, the champion of the Dalits, The caste system, only dimly understood outside the Indian subcontinent, is perhaps the most rigid form of hierarchical social organization in human history. Caste is something like a relic from ancient times and proves the close relationship between India and the hierarchical ancient Greek civilization — a relationship far more direct than that existing between the modern West and antiquity. This book consists of two major parts: a debate between Bhimrao Ambedkar, the champion of the Dalits, and Mahatma Gandhi, as well as a scathing essay by Arundhati Roy about the latter. I found Roy's essay about Gandhi enjoyable, but it also felt too partisan to be taken as the definitive word on him.

What is truly interesting is the contrast between Ambedkar and Gandhi. Gandhi portrayed himself as the champion of the Dalits, and in a way he was. He was against their mistreatment and the oppression that had been inflicted on them over the centuries. He did not, however, want to abolish caste. In line with his general romantic attitude towards the past, Gandhi wanted to reconcile Dalits to their place in the system. In return he wanted others to respect them for their role in it. Gandhi was against the cruel practice of "untouchability," but he wanted to maintain social differentiation, albeit in a way where those tasked with cleaning excrement and those tasked with being priests would still somehow consider each other equal. He did his best to live this example personally. On a mass level it strikes one as a utopian goal.

In a way, Roy argues, Gandhi's campaign on behalf of the Dalits was merely a subtle means of allowing those fortunate enough to be born of high caste to maintain their privileged role in society. The Congress Party as a whole functioned as a vehicle for high caste interests. It is important I think to understand the roots of Gandhi's own sentiments. He was a man who was against the post-Christian West at its very roots. He had experienced the cruelty of the industrial West in apartheid South Africa (a country where he himself was far from pure, as Roy points out) as well as under the British Raj. He didn't want to just fight this civilization by any means available He wanted to reject it in its essence. As Gandhi saw it, caste in India could not be discarded, only reformed. It was part of the imagined culture that he was trying to preserve and defend against modernity.

Ambedkar was different. He was bred in India and rose from the worst depths of caste oppression to become a student at Columbia University and author of India's first constitution. For him the West meant not oppression but liberation. He did not have warm feelings about an idyllic Indian past. For Dalits, the past meant cruelty and hatred that is scarcely imaginable to modern human beings. Ambedkar did not want to reform caste but "annihilate" it in its entirety. All individual men may not be equal, it is true. But the only valid governing principle for a society is equality, since it is impossible to simply sort people across vast categories. No less should it be seen as possible to sort them into appropriate roles before they were even born.

Ambedkar was a reverse Gandhi in many ways. He wore nothing but Western suits as a sign of his liberation, while the former barrister Gandhi wore the lunghi as a sign of his own. Although Ambedkar's sentiments are totally understandable, he lacked a critical perspective on the shortcomings of modern Western civilization that people like Rabindranath Tagore and Gandhi saw. Grappling with those shortcomings has become more important now that that civilization has been truly globalized.

I can see the perspectives of both of these remarkable people. Like Gandhi, I have been shaped by an intimate experience of living within Western civilization. In a time of ecological destruction, rampant inequality and soulless materialism, I have to say that his critiques resonates strongly with me. At the same time, Ambedkar's voice embodies the anguish of those who suffered in the supposed "golden age" before the present era of Western hegemony. There was no golden age anywhere in the past, in fact. At least not for everyone. The ideal village of Gandhi's imagination was a place of torment and humiliation for people like Ambedkar. True, Gandhi wanted to reform that, but he did not want to take the full radical steps that Ambedkar proposed of tearing up the old system root and branch. He didn't experience the pain of being a Dalit.

The dispute between Gandhi and Ambedkar was the clash between modernity and traditionalism in microcosm. In many ways it was an epic misunderstanding borne simply of seeing the world from different perspectives. This misunderstanding persists today. Whereas people in Pakistan might see a McDonalds and very reasonably see in its golden arches a sign of progress and development, we who have grown up among such things often see it as a sign of degradation of urban blight. While others seek to escape the past by pouring as much concrete over it as possible, many of those raised on that concrete are secretly longing for the harmonious idyll that they suspect (often wrongly) preceded it. Both views have a certain validity. Like Ambedkar and Gandhi, your sympathies may depend upon on how and where you were raised. ...more

flag 14 likes · Like · see review

Jul 07, 2016 Nandakishore Varma rated it really liked it · review of another edition

This is actually two books in one: Ambedkar's famous non-delivered speech to the Jat-Pat-Todak-Mandal (an offshoot of the more militantly anti-caste wing of the Arya Samaj, founded in Lahore in 1922: members pledged themselves to a program of anti-caste propaganda, coupled with interdining and intermarriage) and Arundhati Roy’s book length introduction to it. So let me take each in turn.

Ambedkar's book first.

The Jat-Pat-Todak-Mandal was a society for communal reformation. They wanted to remove This is actually two books in one: Ambedkar's famous non-delivered speech to the Jat-Pat-Todak-Mandal (an offshoot of the more militantly anti-caste wing of the Arya Samaj, founded in Lahore in 1922: members pledged themselves to a program of anti-caste propaganda, coupled with interdining and intermarriage) and Arundhati Roy’s book length introduction to it. So let me take each in turn.

Ambedkar's book first.

The Jat-Pat-Todak-Mandal was a society for communal reformation. They wanted to remove caste inequalities within Hinduism. For their annual conference in 1936, they invited Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, the famous politician, social activist, and outspoken critique of Hinduism, to deliver the presidential address. However, after perusing Ambedkar's speech which was much more radical than they had anticipated, they asked him make some changes in it. Ambedkar refused. The speech was not delivered and the meeting did not take place. Later, Ambedkar had the speech printed and published it as a small booklet.

Reading the speech in the twenty-first century, one will not be able to appreciate fully how explosive it was at that point of time. So far, the reform movements within the Hindu fold had been to remove caste inequalities and get the "untouchables" (Ambedkar was one) into the fold of the mainstream, without challenging the tenets of the religion itself. Ambedkar had a different viewpoint. He argued for the demolition of the religious basis for the caste system - including the total rejection of the Vedas, which to him was a body of worthless literature. This was striking at the roots of Hinduism itself. No wonder the "reformers" were aghast - they were advocating medical treatments, and here was a guy who wanted nothing short of surgical removal!

Since I do not take religious books literally, most of the arguments in this speech were evident to me. The width and depth of Ambedkar's knowledge and erudition is breathtaking. However, I have one caveat - the good doctor does not go into the philosophical part of the religion, especially the Upanishads, seeing Hinduism only as a mass of discriminatory laws. One can hardly blame him for it, because he was a man moulded by bitter personal experience. Philosophy does not help when one is allowed only to grub in the dirt for scraps to sustain oneself, just because one was born into a certain community.

Gandhi responded to Ambedkar, in his usual hyperbolic way; saying that the "Varnashrama Dharma" (Caste System) was the best social system ever and only the inequality and untouchability were the problems. In a scathing reply, Ambedkar demolished the Mahatma's arguments and chided him for not willing to meet the problem head on. Both these responses are included in this book and make riveting reading.

Now for Arundhati Roy.

Madam, take a bow. Mark Anthony has nothing on you! Your introduction, "The Doctor and the Saint", is the most perfect hatchet job on a famous and hallowed personality that I have ever seen. Starting in mild terms, especially like Anthony did ("Brutus is an honourable man", remember?), you slowly escalate your attack on the persona of the Mahatma until you present him as a dishonest, opportunistic and racist politician who hijacked the freedom struggle for his own benefit and manipulated the public to get the title of "Mahatma" (the great soul) bestowed on himself.

Your introduction gave me an excellent background for the struggle between Ambedkar and Gandhi, and the whole equation of caste which troubles India even now. I disagree with many of Gandhi's views and agree with most of Ambedkar's. But forgive me if I take your picture of Gandhi with a pinch of salt - that smiling visage is enshrined in mind since childhood, and has informed all my political views on non-violent struggle. Possibly Gandhi is a blackguard and Ambedkar is the real saint, as you say: but I will reserve my judgement till I have read the similar hatchet job perpetrated on Ambedkar by Arun Shourie. ...more

flag 16 likes · Like · see review

Nov 23, 2015 Siddharth rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: favourites

"My quarel with Hindus and Hinduism is not over the imperfections of their social conduct. It is much more fundamental. It is over their ideals."

Reading this Critical Edition of The Annihilation of Caste is like watching back-to-back one-sided boxing matches. The other bloke is helplessly holding his hands up to his face as vicious body-blows rain upon him. As the audience, you periodically wince, but you also enjoy the systematic dismantling of the Other - in this case, Gandhi and Hinduism.

In "My quarel with Hindus and Hinduism is not over the imperfections of their social conduct. It is much more fundamental. It is over their ideals."

Reading this Critical Edition of The Annihilation of Caste is like watching back-to-back one-sided boxing matches. The other bloke is helplessly holding his hands up to his face as vicious body-blows rain upon him. As the audience, you periodically wince, but you also enjoy the systematic dismantling of the Other - in this case, Gandhi and Hinduism.

In her excellent book-length introduction, Arundhati Roy takes on the Mahatma and exposes both his disappointingly racist views on South Africa's blacks during his two decades in the country, and his damaging doublespeak on caste.

"Ordinary politicians oscillate from political expediency to political expediency. A Mahatma grows from truth to truth." Ouch!

In the main course, Ambedkar systematically takes on Hinduism, its sacred books and the "positively pernicious" caste system in an absolutely brilliant argument that deserves to be quoted whole. I will keep myself to one paragraph.

"It is a pity that caste even today has its defenders. The defences are many. It is defended on the ground that the caste system is but another name for division of labour; and if division of labour is a necessary feature of every civilised society, then it is argued that there is nothing wrong in the caste system. Now the first thing that is to be urged against this view is that the caste system is not merely a division of labour. It is also a division of labourers. Civilised society undoubtedly needs division of labour. But in no civilised society is division of labour accompanied by this unnatural division of labourers into watertight compartments. The caste system is not merely a division of labourers—which is quite different from division of labour—it is a hierarchy in which the divisions of labourers are graded one above the other."

The notes by S. Anand are meticulous, as is his brief account of the Communal Award of 1932 (which awarded a separate electorate for Dalits, and also gave them a vote in the general electorate), and the Mahatma's ridiculous fast-unto-death form of blackmail which forced Ambedkar to accede to the Poona Pact (reserved seats - not separate electorates).

5 stars. Should be made compulsory reading in schools. It won't be.
...more

flag 13 likes · Like · see review

Sep 18, 2014 Saloni Mehra rated it it was amazing

Without doubt, this book is perhaps one of the most well researched and scholarly works on the caste system of India and Hinduism. Dr. Ambedkar with his irrefutable observations and sound arguments puts forward a strong case against casteism in the Indian society, especially in the context of its implications for the Depressed Classes. His prolific writings backed by evidence from the Hindu scriptures will make you challenge your own beliefs on a number of occasions throughout the book. ...more

flag 14 likes · Like · see review

Mar 07, 2014 Bhavia rated it it was amazing

This is an amazing book.How much I wish this book were taught in the school.Then the kids would have understood the real situation at a much younger age rather than studying half baked and flattering stories about Indian leaders and Indian History

flag 10 likes · Like · see review

Jul 08, 2019 Navya rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: indian, non-fiction

Difficult to review such a formative text.

I enjoyed Roy's introduction, in and of itself very informative as well as exceptionally good in setting the context for Dr Ambedkar's undelivered speech. A brief history of caste and anti-caste activism in independent India would also have been very helpful.

A must read, especially for Hindu Savarnas.

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Mar 22, 2013 Rahul Bhalerao rated it it was amazing

Shelves: favorites

Revolutionary! For an average reader it may take hardly an hour or two to read this speech-turned-article. But the one who reads it is ought to be transformed. The myth goes that Saheb Kanshiram when first read this book, the first thing he did was to beat himself with his own shoes out of the frustration of being unaware and inactive about the situation of the Dalits in India. The BSP and BAMCEF activism in political and social arena that has given representation and power to millions of Dalits ...more

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Jan 15, 2018 Surbhi Singh rated it it was amazing

This is one of the most well-researched and thought out speech I have read. He presents his argument in the most erudite fashion and paints a thought-provoking picture of the times. A must read, not only for the way he dissects the caste system and renders it meaningless, but also for the brilliant oration.
I picked this up right after reading Ta-Nehisi Coates' "Between the World and Me". After being deeply moved by the plight of the black man, I wanted to examine something closer to home. This ...more

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Apr 07, 2014 Varad Deshmukh rated it it was amazing

Annihilation of Caste is a breach of peace. Arundhati Roy could not have a more fitting summary to this radical literature by Dr. Ambedkar.

This book is a journey of rational arguments to counter every upholding cause for the the chaturvarna and the caste system. The world is not simply divided into those that strongly oppose caste, and those that are strongly for it. The case was not different in the early 1900's when the Hindu revolutionaries began to question the basis for their smritis and Annihilation of Caste is a breach of peace. Arundhati Roy could not have a more fitting summary to this radical literature by Dr. Ambedkar.

This book is a journey of rational arguments to counter every upholding cause for the the chaturvarna and the caste system. The world is not simply divided into those that strongly oppose caste, and those that are strongly for it. The case was not different in the early 1900's when the Hindu revolutionaries began to question the basis for their smritis and shrutis. Some believed, like Mahatma Gandhi, that the caste system (or even varna system) is necessary for a "stable social order." Some like the Jat-Pat-Todak mandal agreed that it was an evil, but looked for less radical ways to solve it, through inter-marriage and inter-dining (which did not gain popularity).

Dr. Ambedkar beautifully challenged the entire spectrum of apologists of the caste system, by directly attacking the Hindu shastras. "Caste is a notion; it is a state of mind." And this state of mind has been cultivated through the laws to be followed by a devout Hindu. Dr. Ambedkar maintained that the only way to get rid of the poison, is to cut off its source of supply -- the Hindu scriptures.

Not much has changed of yet. The oppression of the backward classes : physically, socially and economically, the rampant Brahminism (where each caste closes the doors to the one below it), the absence of representation of these classes (despite the enforced reservations) in political, educational, religious and social institutions, the severe excommunication and mistrust of other castes, etc. The division has become more severe, and yet, our understanding of the shastras has reduced even further. Dr. Ambedkar asks this fundamental question : Do we have the courage to give up and question our shastras, something which these same shastras prevent us from doing? Have we not had enough with blindly upholding the holy cow that we partially understand?

The way I see it, Annihilation of Caste is not just about abolishing caste. Its a serious attack on every Pooja we perform (including those before satellite launches by ISRO), every deity we worship, every custom we follow. Not that they have to be necessarily evil/wrong, but holding them in the court of rigorous scientific advances and fresh evidences has become the need of the day. Dr. Ambedkar reflects the thoughts of Bhagat Singh, "Any man who stands for progress has to criticize, disbelieve and challenge every item of the old faith. Item by item he has to reason out every nook and corner of the prevailing faith. If after considerable reasoning one is led to believe in any theory or philosophy, his faith is welcomed. His reasoning can be mistaken, wrong, misled and sometimes fallacious. But he is liable to correction because reason is the guiding star of his life. But mere faith and blind faith is dangerous: it dulls the brain, and makes a man reactionary."

We are all looking for a political revolution. We all want more development, progress, and are out to put India on the world map. Dr. Ambedkar, with so many supporting examples, has demonstrated that a political revolution cannot happen without a social revolution. 1947 is a story of a failure of social (and hence, political) revolution. We are now moving towards another political revolution, and to strengthen it, we have to read Ambedkar.

Annihilation of Caste, is indeed, a breach of peace. ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Mar 22, 2015 Himanshu Khurana rated it it was amazing

You may or may not agree with him, but it is beyond any doubt that Annihilation of Caste remains a brilliant exposition of the greatest ill -caste- that plagues Indian society and its downtrodden. I wish at least its ideas are proliferated among the people if everyone can't read it. However this is apart from the fact that the introduction by Roy was on the whole lacked understanding of the issue and seemed more about Gandhi bashing rather than about Ambedkar and his brilliantly researched and ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Jun 11, 2014 Ashna Singh rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Religion is the root of all evil...

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

May 05, 2019 GV rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: 5-stars, atheism, politics

This book is way ahead of its time. Ambedkar was truly an intellectual heavyweight and shreds the arguments made by caste apologists. Especially loved the part where he ran circles around Gandhi and his Varna system sophistry. I chuckled several times when he cheekily exposed Gandhi's inconsistencies and used Gandhi's arguments against him. Annihilation, it was.

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Apr 14, 2015 Mohit rated it it was amazing

Every Indian should read this masterpiece.

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Nov 10, 2018 Shreya Joshi rated it really liked it

Shelves: 2018-reads

From the moment I read this book, I have been asking myself, "What makes me a Hindu?"
Passive acceptance of beliefs?
Indifference to religion?
Not following other religions?
Fearing the umpteen number of Gods/Goddesses?
Worshiping idols?
Importantly, embracing the caste that I am born into?
To be absolutely honest, I do not consider myself very religious. I have not religiously studied the sacred texts such as the Vedas, Manusmritis or even the Bhagvad Gita. As a result,unlike a learned person or a

From the moment I read this book, I have been asking myself, "What makes me a Hindu?"
Passive acceptance of beliefs?
Indifference to religion?
Not following other religions?
Fearing the umpteen number of Gods/Goddesses?
Worshiping idols?
Importantly, embracing the caste that I am born into?
To be absolutely honest, I do not consider myself very religious. I have not religiously studied the sacred texts such as the Vedas, Manusmritis or even the Bhagvad Gita. As a result,unlike a learned person or a academician or even a practitioner I am unable and ill-fitted to defend or explain the foundations of my religion or my religious beliefs.
But Ambedkar makes a point, very simple, reasonable yet difficult to wholly accept, that Hinduism is nothing but a collection of castes. The religion relies on this arbitrarily built caste system that discriminates people merely on the virtue of their birth. As much as I can confidently speak for the abolition of any sort of hierarchical caste system that does not believe in values I respect such as equality and mutual co-operation, I cannot accept that caste is all there is to Hinduism. And only by denouncing Hinduism, he argues can the caste system be abolished.
I wonder why this sudden personal need to uphold Hinduism for me? I have been enraged and frustrated and saddened by how it views women time and again. Still, Hinduism has been a part of my sub-conscious faith system. For all my life, being a Hindu has been following (with rebellion, disbelief, ridicule, acceptance) what my parents nearly blindly followed their parents who followed their parents who followed their parents who followed their parents and so on until nobody in the chain can convincingly explain with reason why they do what they do and why have they been passing down what they have been doing. So, has hindusim been nothing but a passed heirloom of life style and habits?
Have I been shielded by the horrors of the caste system to fully grasp that my religion is the root of all evil. But I believed my religion has moved on from teachings of the so-called sacred books to some mundane unquestioned and un-scrutinized practices that may or may not resemble the higher authority they were derived from.

I do not support the caste system, especially the one that treats people based on the lottery of birth, the caste system that normalizes discrimination among people and allows people to tread on other people. But in order to abolish this nonsensical clique of a system, should I denounce the little faith I have assembled as a modern Hindu?

On a completely different note, isn’t the caste system already getting irrelevant with people following different professions and marrying their choice? Or is it just me unable to see the atrocious caste system at play from my ivory tower fenced with ignorance?

-Practical Suggestion: Read the Speech of Ambedkar, then read the letters exchanged between Gandhi and Ambedkar and only then read the essay written by Arundhati Roy titled "The Doctor and the Saint".

...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Sep 16, 2014 Mukesh Kumar rated it liked it · review of another edition

Recommends it for: They say every Indian should read the writings of Gandhi, Ambedkar and Nehru.

Recommended to Mukesh by: Dilip C Mandal

Edit: As I mention in the review, my review could be ill-informed and ignorant. And I suspect it is, when I read it now 3 years later. This is a seminal text, probably the most radical anti-caste book ever, by the greatest intellectual/social scientist/constitution maker/activist/economist all rolled into one of the 20th century in the subcontinent. And the following review lacks the true understanding of caste system, which is a pre requisite before reading this book
Edit: As I mention in the review, my review could be ill-informed and ignorant. And I suspect it is, when I read it now 3 years later. This is a seminal text, probably the most radical anti-caste book ever, by the greatest intellectual/social scientist/constitution maker/activist/economist all rolled into one of the 20th century in the subcontinent. And the following review lacks the true understanding of caste system, which is a pre requisite before reading this book
_______________________________________________________

The book evoked extremely contradictory emotions in me. While I thoroughly enjoyed Dr Ambedkar's rational arguments and his invocation of scientific temper and principles of fraternity, equality and liberty in the later sections of the book and his scathing retort to the Mahatma regarding the caste question, still I couldn't help but feel highly disturbed by his arguments and reasoning put forward for the destruction of caste system, in the initial parts of the book. Disturbed because they seemed eerily similar to the logic and arguments forwarded by the 'Hindutva' brigade. It was shocking, to say the least, to read Dr Ambedkar espousing reasons like : to turn Hinduism into a 'missionary' religion, to turn it into a 'sangathit' group against the 'threats' of the other faiths and the most embarrassing of them all was when he called all the tribals of India as 'savages' that needed to be 'civilized'. These are very discomfirting, specially since they came from one of the founding fathers of our nation, whose intellect was beyond comparison and whose life was committed to the upliftment of the oppressed and not from the journals or propaganda pieces of the Sangh or other 'Hindutva' elements. But then Ambedkar corrects/contradicts himself later in the book, when he defiantly declares that you can't paint a whole community by a single brush and consistently puts forward rational arguments in favour of individualism and the need to reject religions as the centrepiece of morality. So it ended well, though my discomfort still remains. I shudder to imagine if Babasaheb, may have inadvertently, helped the Hindutvavadis to gain traction and may have provided them with their pet theories through this book, which I am told was quite popular in its day. I sincerely that hope I am wrong and ill-informed regarding this.

( Dr B.R Ambedkar's speech that was to be delivered, at the 'Jaat-Paat Todak Mandal' assembly in Lahore in 1937, which was deemed too radical for the times and the event scrapped, was turned into a book by the great man himself. The book also contains Mahatma Gandhi's views on the book in the newspaper 'Harijan' and Dr Ambedkar's reply to Gandhiji. ) ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Dec 23, 2016 Vinay rated it it was amazing

I should have read this book a long time ago. Although I disagree with a lot of what Arundhati Roy has to say, her introduction sets the stage for Ambedkar well.

Few of the (many) things I found interesting:

On Caste
- Loved Ambedkar’s definition of caste in Hinduism: “Caste is like a multistoried building with no exit and no staircase. You live and die in the same floor you were born into"
- I’d read articles about how Gandhi was a lot more complex than his traditional image, but Arundhati Roy’s I should have read this book a long time ago. Although I disagree with a lot of what Arundhati Roy has to say, her introduction sets the stage for Ambedkar well.

Few of the (many) things I found interesting:

On Caste
- Loved Ambedkar’s definition of caste in Hinduism: “Caste is like a multistoried building with no exit and no staircase. You live and die in the same floor you were born into"
- I’d read articles about how Gandhi was a lot more complex than his traditional image, but Arundhati Roy’s story of his conflicting views on caste and case was the first time I’ve read a lot of these views. Not sure how much of it is her opinion and how much is fact - hope it's opinion.
- Political institutions should be influenced by existing societal structures. India might have needed a structure similar to what the Romans had (separate consuls and electorates for Plebs and Patricians etc.), given its stratification of caste.
- Socialism is built on the idea that the only form of power is through property. But religious and caste also defines power in society. For ex, the Oracle of Delphi ultimately approved/rejected who should be the plebeian consul in Rome, irrespective of the outcome of the election
- Grouping in society is not uncommon and isn't necessarily bad. The strength of a society, however, depends on the presence of points of contact - "organic filaments". There isn't an integrating force in caste in Hinduism

On Reform
- Inter caste marriages is a powerful driver of change, something that is become more pronounced in Indian cities today. "Fusion of blood can alone create the feeling of kith and kin"
- The real solution is to dismantle Hinduism. Hinduism is a set of rules, not principles, so it is difficult to find alternate, more progressive, interpretations.
+ The idea that priesthood becomes a profession, like law and medicine. That it shouldn’t be hereditary or birth based. Priests should be a servant of the state and should be regulated by law

I disagreed with some parts (professionalizing priesthood, for instance) but, if nothing else, Ambedkar's last idea sets the foundation for larger reform: Hindus should reflect if they are willing to let their religion change and transform or if they want it to remain the way it’s always been historically. ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Mar 15, 2019 Amirtha Shri rated it really liked it · review of another edition

"What is this Hindu religion? Is it a set of principles, or is it a code of rules? ... The moment it degenerates into rules, it ceases to be a religion, as it kills the responsibility which is the essence of a truly religious act."

The abandoned speech of Dr. Ambedkar for Jat-Pat Todak Mandal made it into the powerful and well articulated book this is! The injustice, hypocrisy, and prostitution of the caste system - practiced especially by members of higher caste - is broken down to digestible "What is this Hindu religion? Is it a set of principles, or is it a code of rules? ... The moment it degenerates into rules, it ceases to be a religion, as it kills the responsibility which is the essence of a truly religious act."

The abandoned speech of Dr. Ambedkar for Jat-Pat Todak Mandal made it into the powerful and well articulated book this is! The injustice, hypocrisy, and prostitution of the caste system - practiced especially by members of higher caste - is broken down to digestible pieces and fed with sufficient examples and well-founded arguments. To annihilate caste, one must go back to the cause of it and renounce / modify the religion that subscribes to it. I felt the arguments were more elaborate and valid than the solution proposed i.e. the forced evolution of religion to accommodate morality and operate based on principles, in a way, it appears as if the answer lies in turning the Hindu religion into a political system.

I would wholeheartedly abandon religion rather than try to put effort to fix a flawed and outdated belief system. Again, as Dr. Ambedkar says, this is not to say the entire religion has no merit, but "anyone who relies on an attempt to turn members of the caste Hindus into better men by improving their personal character is wasting his energy and hugging an illusion... how can you accept personal character to make a man loaded with consciousness of caste a good man, i.e. a man who would treat his fellow men as friends or equals?"

It is the impossibility of radical evolution of the religion that acts to its demerit and has elevated its insensitivity with time. "Reason and morality are the two most powerful weapons in the armory of a reformer. To deprive him of these weapons is to disable him for action." Perhaps, that is among the true intentions of the religion.

In a vindication of caste, Mahatma Gandhi raises questions "absolutely besides the point and the main argument of the speech is lost on him." The replies of Dr. Ambedkar are sharp and quick-witted. One might be moved to excitement and whistle-blowing at the deftly put rejoinders. This book should surely be read by anyone who believe that the Hindu caste system holds an ounce of merit and relevance in the current way of life. ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Oct 10, 2019 Prasan rated it it was amazing

Reading Ambedkar is an absolute pleasure. His fearlessness and dedication to social justice are combined with a clarity of thought that is exceptional.

The edition I review, by Verso Books, is divided into three portions — the first of which is an essay by Arundhati Roy, “The Doctor and the Saint”, which provides some background for the fundamental dispute between Ambedkar and Gandhi. In order to understand this, its useful to understand the caste system as it operated when this book was written Reading Ambedkar is an absolute pleasure. His fearlessness and dedication to social justice are combined with a clarity of thought that is exceptional.

The edition I review, by Verso Books, is divided into three portions — the first of which is an essay by Arundhati Roy, “The Doctor and the Saint”, which provides some background for the fundamental dispute between Ambedkar and Gandhi. In order to understand this, its useful to understand the caste system as it operated when this book was written in the 1930s — the best analog for the way caste operated in India then is the way race operated in the United States during that same period, especially in the Jim Crow South. “Superior” castes (akin to whites in the Jim Crow South) were able to enforce an economic and social hierarchy through both oppressive social conventions and the threat of mob violence (when conventions were broken).

Gandhi wanted to do away with “untouchability”, that is, the strict barrier between the people of the lowest caste (Dalits, or अवर्ण) and the remaining castes (सवर्ण). However, he did not want to mandate the abolition of caste entirely, as he himself was an orthodox Hindu. He believed that once untouchability was abolished, upper caste people should recognize that while people of all castes have equal standing in society, they are all suited for different tasks. This was largely in line with the “genetic thinking” prevalent throughout the Western world at the time.

Ambedkar, on the other hand, wanted to abolish caste entirely. He focused his energy on ending the practice that he termed “Brahminism”. He posited that once the group holding power adopted a practice of social separation, there would be an “infection of imitation”, whereby every other social group would attempt to do the same, directing their social oppression at the group immediately “below” them. Therefore, the only way to create an equal society was to target the very heart of the oppression itself — to abolish caste entirely, and to denounce any religious scripture that sanctions caste practices.

The second part of the book is Ambedkar’s essay on the annihilation of caste — which was scheduled to be delivered to the Jaat-Paat Todak Mandal but was ultimately canceled because it was deemed too provocative. The Jaat-Paat Todak Mandal (which translates roughly to “the abolition of caste committee”) was a group of Hindu reformers seeking to radically reform the religion to eliminate caste entirely. However, while they wanted to abolish caste, they were ultimately not willing to give up Hinduism, and some portions of Ambedkar’s speech involved direct attacks on the shastras, to which there was significant objection. Still, they should be seen sympathetically, as they are quite radical social reformers for their time and aim at a fully equal society (unlike members of the orthodoxy).

Ambedkar’s criticism of Brahminism is very incisive, and is a useful tool to look at parallel systems of hierarchy that exist today. For example, the “citizenship hierarchy” that exists in most countries in the West — with citizens on top, legal immigrants in the middle, and undocumented immigrants at the very bottom — mirrors the caste system very closely in the way it actually functions. Even the so-called “enlightened & progressive” nations in Western Europe have no objection to treating the last category of people in much the same way that Dalits were treated in India at the time of this writing.

Similarly the Jim Crow caste hierarchy might have started with just two castes (“white” and “black”), but before long there was additional stratification with a significant level of social discrimination targeted at Catholics and Jews as well. Once the infection of Brahminism begins, it rarely stops, it continues to subdivide and grow until it is attacked at its root.

Throughout the essay, Ambedkar skillfully combines his attacks on the social evil of caste with an aspirational vision of what could come next. That is, as he argues forcefully against what is the “old India” (which his opponent, Gandhi, has idealized), he also begins to provide the material for the formation of a “new India”. In one sense, Ambedkar can be seen as one of the first genuine nationalists — but one that argues for an inclusive nationalism of liberty, equality, and fraternity between all Indian people; which can only be achieved through the abolition of caste (and of the old religions and method of religious thinking). Ambedkar’s vision for India is a “Prabuddha Bharat (प्रभुद्द भारत)”, or enlightened India. He places himself squarely in the proud anti-caste tradition of the subcontinent, of which the Buddha, Ravidas, Guru Nanak, and Kabir are the most famous proponents. In this sense, he differs greatly from most social critics, as he advocates for the building of a new nation as he attacks the old. This is really what gives his book tremendous moral strength, and imbibes the reader with hope for the future rather than disappointment at the present.

The third portion of the book involves a series of back and forth letters between Ambedkar and Gandhi, where this discussion continues. One interesting topic that is extremely relevant to the modern age is regarding the ideal mode of development. Here, Gandhi seems almost prophetic, when he predicts that if the entirety of the world adopts the Western mode of development, the environment will be hopelessly ravaged, and we will all live in hellish conditions. Gandhi therefore idealizes the self-governing villages of India, and argues for continuing that model with some reforms. But for Ambedkar and the Dalits, those self-governing villages were already hell. For the Dalit, the city is the place where he can break free of this local tyranny and breathe the air of freedom. Again, for those familiar with American history, this will undoubtedly remind you of the migration of black people from their local tyrannies in the Jim Crow South to the cities of the North on their freedom trains (for those unfamiliar with this history, “The Warmth of Other Suns” is a fantastic book). This unresolved argument continues to this day, and humanity at large has found no acceptable solution.

In summary, this book is a very important read, not only for its historic value, but for its relevance to the present. The caste system carries on in a less explicit form — not just in India, but throughout the world in various guises (race, sect, citizenship) — to this day. The discussion between Ambedkar and Gandhi on the modes of economic development are more important than ever in the era of climate change and mass ecological destruction. And Ambedkar’s excoriation of religious orthodoxy is a must-read in an era where religious regressives of all stripes are once again rearing their heads. Reading Ambedkar gives you a taste of freedom and hope like nothing else.

Prabhuddha Bharat Zindabad.
...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Oct 01, 2019 The_Reader rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Excellent! First the introduction by Arundhati Roy and then the last part concerning the Poona Pact by S. Anand make this book more enriched. It makes the already amazing arguments put forward by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar in ‘Annihilation of caste’ more relevant in today's context. This book has introduced me to the writings of Ambedkar and showed what an amazing human being he was and for which I’ll always be grateful. Ambedkar tried his best to bring the ‘untouchables’ to main stream of the society

...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Oct 29, 2015 Akshay Narayanan rated it it was amazing

A book which is as relevant today as when it was written, as the issue it addresses is as poisonous today as it was when the book was penned(or typed or whatever). Probably more, given the consolidation of the wave of Hindutva happening across the country and the preeminence of the RSS and the BJP, particularly in light of the forces of Hindutva trying to claim Ambedkar as their own. The book is everything that you expect it to be, even accounting for the high standards to be expected from the ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Oct 14, 2012 Ch Sandeep rated it it was amazing

Most important book I had read. He tears into the malaise of caste in the Hindu society. Bhimrao's erudite synthesis of this reply to Gandhi has inspired veneration for him. The essay has simply opened my mind.
He supports his title from all different aspects history and fall of Hinduism, economics, culture, unity and identity for Hindus, the scientific evidence against 'eugenics criterion for caste' etc. This a truly scholarly essay for every Indian to read.

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Apr 10, 2014 Umesh Kesavan rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: non-fiction, politics

Arundhati Roy writes a very fitting and rebellious introduction to what is an outright rejection of caste and Hindu sacred texts.Hope this new edition of Ambedkar's magnum opus reaches more young minds.S.Anand's meticulously researched notes add to the depth of the argument.

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Sep 17, 2018 Mridul Kapoor rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

I don't think a work this important requires a rating

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Mar 28, 2014 Anuja rated it it was amazing

Very well-researched, scathing and rational arguments..a very thought-provoking write-up.

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend It | Stats | Recent Status Updates

Readers also enjoyed

See similar books…

Genres

Nonfiction

98 users

Cultural > India

89 users

Politics

66 users

History

57 users

Philosophy

20 users

See top shelves…

About B.R. Ambedkar

B.R. Ambedkar

489 followers

“An idea needs propagation as much as a plant needs watering.”

Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (1891–1956)
Founding Father, Modern India
MA 1915, PhD 1927
LLD 1952 (hon.)

Ambedkar was a leader in the struggle for Indian independence, the architect of the new nation's constitution, and the champion of civil rights for the 60 million members of the "untouchable" caste, to which he belonged. He spoke and wrote “An idea needs propagation as much as a plant needs watering.”

Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (1891–1956)
Founding Father, Modern India
MA 1915, PhD 1927
LLD 1952 (hon.)

Ambedkar was a leader in the struggle for Indian independence, the architect of the new nation's constitution, and the champion of civil rights for the 60 million members of the "untouchable" caste, to which he belonged. He spoke and wrote ceaselessly on behalf of "untouchables," but his passion for justice was broad: in 1950 he resigned from his position as the country's first minister of law when Nehru's cabinet refused to pass the Women's Rights Bill. Ambedkar was committed to maintaining his independence, and many of the positions he staked out in a long and complex relationship with Gandhi—on the future of Hinduism, for example—remain central to debate within Indian society.
Source: http://c250.columbia.edu/c250_celebra...

From Wikipedia:
Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar popularly also known as Babasaheb, was an Indian jurist, political leader, philosopher, anthropologist, historian, orator, economist, and editor.
He was also the Chairman of the Drafting Committee of Indian Constitution.
Born into a poor Mahar (considered an Untouchable caste) family, Ambedkar spent his whole life fighting against social discrimination, the system of Chaturvarna – the categorization of Hindu society into four varnas – and the Hindu caste system.
He converted to Buddhism and is also credited with providing a spark for the conversion of hundreds of thousands of untouchables to Theravada Buddhism. Ambedkar was posthumously awarded the Bharat Ratna, India's highest civilian award, in 1990.
Overcoming numerous social and financial obstacles, Ambedkar became one of the first outcastes to obtain a college education in India.
Eventually earning law degrees and multiple doctorates for his study and research in law, economics and political science from Columbia University and the London School of Economics, Ambedkar gained a reputation as a scholar and practiced law for a few years, later campaigning by publishing journals advocating political rights and social freedom for India's so-called untouchables. He is regarded as a Bodhisattva by some Indian Buddhists, though he never claimed himself to be a Bodhisattva.

About His Studies at Columbia University:
Ambedkar received a scholarship to Columbia from the Maharajah of Baroda. He earned his MA in 1915 and then obtained a DSc at the London School of Economics before being awarded his Columbia PhD in 1927. In 1952, Columbia presented him with an honorary doctorate for his service as "a great social reformer and a valiant upholder of human rights." In 1995, a bronze bust of Ambedkar was donated to Lehman Library by the Federation of Ambedkarite and Buddhist Organizations of the United Kingdom.

At Columbia, Ambedkar studied under John Dewey, who inspired many of his ideas about equality and social justice. Ambedkar later recounted that at Columbia he experienced social equality for the first time. "The best friends I have had in my life," he told the New York Times in 1930, "were some of my classmates at Columbia and my great professors, John Dewey, James Shotwell, Edwin Seligman, and James Harvey Robinson."
...more

Books by B.R. Ambedkar

Castes in India: Their Mechanism, Genesis and Development

The Buddha and His Dhamma: A Critical Edition

The Problem of the Rupee: its origin and its solution

More…

Trivia About Annihilation of C...

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from Annihilation of C...

“Constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment. It has to be cultivated. We must realise that our people have yet to learn it. Democracy in India is only a top-dressing on an Indian soil which is essentially undemocratic.” — 34 likes

“The Hindus criticise the Mahomedans for having spread their religion by the use of the sword. They also ridicule Christianity on the score of the Inquisition.

But really speaking, who is better and more worthy of our respect—the Mahomedans and Christians who attempted to thrust down the throats of unwilling persons what they regarded as necessary for their salvation, or the Hindu who would not spread the light, who would endeavour to keep others in darkness, who would not consent to share his intellectual and social inheritance with those who are ready and willing to make it a part of their own make-up?

I have no hesitation in saying that if the Mahomedan has been cruel, the Hindu has been mean; and meanness is worse than cruelty.” — 30 likes

More quotes…

See a Problem?

Preview — Annihilation of Caste by B.R. Ambedkar

Annihilation of Caste

Get A Copy

Friend Reviews

Reader Q&A

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

Readers also enjoyed

Genres

About B.R. Ambedkar

Books by B.R. Ambedkar

Trivia About Annihilation of C...

Quotes from Annihilation of C...

See a Problem?

Preview — Annihilation of Caste by B.R. Ambedkar

Annihilation of Caste

Get A Copy

Friend Reviews

Reader Q&A

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topicDiscuss This Book

Readers also enjoyed

Genres

About B.R. Ambedkar

Books by B.R. Ambedkar

Trivia About Annihilation of C...

Quotes from Annihilation of C...

new topic
Discuss This Book