Gandhi and the Caste System: A Journey Through His Anti-Untouchability Campaign

Throughout his campaign, Gandhi faced opposition from orthodox and reactionary factions. They disrupted his meetings, staged black flag demonstrations, and accused him of assaulting Hinduism. Additionally, these elements aligned with the government against Congress and the Civil Disobedience Movement. In August 1934, the government sided with them by defeating the Temple Entry Bill. Orthodox Hindu opinion in Bengal opposed the acceptance of permanent caste Hindu minority status under the Poona Pact.

Gandhi’s Harijan Campaign and Thoughts on Caste

Determined to counteract the government’s divisive “divide and rule” policy, Gandhi abandoned all other commitments and initiated an intensive campaign against untouchability—initially from prison and later, following his release in August 1933, outside prison.

While incarcerated, he established the All India Anti-Untouchability League in September 1932 and launched the weekly publication, Harijan, in January 1933. Upon regaining freedom, Gandhi relocated to the Satyagraha Ashram in Wardha, adhering to his vow made in 1930 not to return to Sabarmati Ashram until swaraj (self-rule) was achieved.

Starting from Wardha, he embarked on a nationwide Harijan tour between November 1933 and July 1934, covering 20,000 km. 

• Fundraising for Eradication of Untouchability: During this journey, he raised funds for the newly established Harijan Sevak Sangh and advocated for the eradication of untouchability in all its manifestations. 
• Mobilizing Political Workers: Gandhi encouraged political workers to engage in village activities aimed at the social, economic, political, and cultural upliftment of the Harijans. 
• Symbolic Gesture: He undertook two fasts—on May 8 and August 16, 1934—to emphasize the gravity of his efforts and underscore the importance of the issue. These fasts stirred emotional turmoil within the nationalist ranks.

Throughout his Harijan tour, social work, and fasts, Gandhi emphasized several key themes:

• He delivered a scathing indictment of Hindu society for the oppression suffered by Harijans.
• He advocated for the complete eradication of untouchability, symbolized by his call to open temples to untouchables.
• Gandhi underscored the need for caste Hindus to perform ‘penance’ for the immense suffering inflicted upon Harijans. Despite criticism, he was not hostile to figures like Ambedkar, stating, “Hinduism dies if untouchability lives, untouchability has to die if Hinduism is to live.”
• The entire campaign was grounded in principles of humanism and reason, asserting that the Shastras did not endorse untouchability. If they did, they should be disregarded as it contradicted human dignity.

Gandhi opposed merging the issue of removing untouchability with that of inter-caste marriages and inter-dining. 

• Focus on Specific Issues: He believed such restrictions existed among both caste Hindus and Harijans themselves. 
  • As the nationwide campaign primarily targeted disabilities specific to Harijans at the time, he saw no need to address broader issues.

Similarly, Gandhi differentiated between the abolition of untouchability and the elimination of the caste system itself. 

• Gandhi’s Defense of Varnashrama: Unlike Ambedkar, who advocated annihilating the caste system to eradicate untouchability, Gandhi believed the varnashrama system, despite its limitations, was not inherently sinful. 
• Gandhi’s View on Untouchability: He argued that untouchability was a byproduct of distinctions of high and low, not the caste system itself. 
  • If purged of such distinctions, the varnashrama could function in a complementary manner rather than perpetuating hierarchies.

Gandhi hoped that supporters and critics of the caste system would unite against untouchability. He believed eliminating untouchability would positively impact communal and other issues, as opposition to untouchability meant challenging notions of superiority and inferiority. 

• Gandhi opposed using compulsion against orthodox Hindus, referring to them as ‘sanatanis.’ 
• He sought to win them over through persuasion, appealing to their reason and hearts. 
• His fasts aimed to inspire friends and followers to intensify efforts to abolish untouchability.

Gandhi’s Harijan campaign encompassed an internal reform program for Harijans, focusing on education, cleanliness, hygiene, abstaining from eating beef and carrion, refraining from consuming liquor, and eliminating untouchability among themselves.

Impact of the Campaign 

Gandhi consistently characterized the campaign as more than a political movement, emphasizing its primary purpose to cleanse Hinduism and Hindu society. Over time, the campaign extended the message of nationalism to Harijans, who predominantly worked as agricultural laborers across the country. This, in turn, resulted in their growing involvement in both national and peasant movements.

Ideological Differences and Similarities between Gandhi and Ambedkar

• Symbolic Actions: Both leaders engaged in powerful symbolic acts—Gandhi burning foreign cloth and Ambedkar burning Manusmriti—each representing India’s struggle against bondage and slavery.
• Acts of Catharsis: Salt from the ocean and water from the Mahad tank were not mere gestures but acts of political catharsis and social philosophy, laden with symbolism.
• Freedom Perspectives: Gandhi believed in people wrestling for freedom from authority, while Ambedkar expected imperial rulers to bestow freedom.
• Views on Democracy: Ambedkar advocated a parliamentary system, contrasting Gandhi’s skepticism and belief that democracy tends to transform into a mass democracy dominated by leaders.
• Ideological Rigidity: Ambedkar held rigid principles, while Gandhi, with no fixed ideology, championed the uncompromising principle of non-violence.
• Political Alternatives: Gandhi proposed practical alternatives to prevailing ideologies, while Ambedkar leaned towards liberal ideology and desired institutional frameworks.
• Perspectives on Indian Unity: Gandhi emphasized Indian unity in the face of British rule, while Ambedkar highlighted Indian unity as a by-product of the legal system introduced by the imperial state.
• Political Stream Alternatives: Gandhi suggested alternatives to 20th-century political streams like liberalism, communism, and fascism, while Ambedkar was inclined towards liberal ideology and institutional structures.
• Disunity vs. Unity: Ambedkar’s politics emphasized Indian disunity, while Gandhi’s Gandhian politics aimed to showcase Indian unity disrupted by British rule, as argued in ‘Hind Swaraj.’
• Legal System’s Role in Unity: Gandhi posited that India was a nation before British rule, broken by imperialism. 
  • Ambedkar saw Indian unity as a by-product of the legal system introduced by the imperial state.
• Gandhi’s ‘Gramraj’ – ‘Ramraj’: For Gandhi, the ideal village (‘Gramraj’) embodied ‘Ramraj’—true independence for Indians. He saw the village as the cornerstone of real freedom.
• Ambedkar’s Critique of Village System: Ambedkar, however, viewed Indian villages as status-quo denying equality, fraternity, and liberty. 
  • The pervasive issues of casteism and untouchability in rural areas fueled his skepticism.
• Social Hierarchy Concerns: Ambedkar feared that ‘Gramraj’ would perpetuate social hierarchies rooted in discrimination and inequality, leading him to strongly denounce the Indian village system.
• Approach to Social Reforms: While Gandhi believed in the use of compulsion or force for social integration and reforms, Ambedkar rejected this approach. 
  • Instead, both leaders converged on the idea of proper education as a means to instill the desire for change, reform, and integration in individuals.
• Deprived Classes Development Views: Gandhi’s terming of the depressed classes as ‘Harijan’ faced criticism from Ambedkar, who deemed it a clever scheme. 
  • Ambedkar parted ways with the organization when it was renamed Harijan Sevak Sangh, asserting that Gandhi’s focus on removing untouchability was merely a platform, not a sincere program.
• Religious Center: Man vs. God: Ambedkar emphasized that the center of religion should be between man and man, not solely between man and God, as advocated by Gandhi. Initially open to reforming Hinduism, Ambedkar later denounced it, asserting that it couldn’t be reformed.
• Scriptural Views: Ambedkar rejected the Vedas and Hindu scriptures, asserting their lack of unified understanding and the manifestation of the caste system and untouchability. 
  • In contrast, Gandhi believed caste and varna were distinct, viewing caste as perverse degeneration.
• Freedom and Citizenship: Ambedkar advocated freedom of religion, free citizenship, and the separation of State and religion. 
  • Gandhi, while endorsing freedom of religion, opposed the separation of politics and religion, emphasizing religion as an agent of social change.
• Sovereign Power: Both leaders envisioned limited sovereign power for the State, with Ambedkar emphasizing the ultimate sovereignty of the people. 
  • Gandhi believed absolute sovereign power would annihilate individual spirit, championing the idea of least governance.
• Violence and Non-violence: Ambedkar distinguished between absolute non-violence as an end and relative violence as a means. 
  • Gandhi, an avowed opponent of violence, emphasized purity of means determining the end.
• Modernization and Social Transformation: Gandhi feared the dehumanizing impact of mechanization, linking it to exploitative socioeconomic orders. 
  • Ambedkar attributed negative effects to wrong social organizations, viewing machinery and modern civilization as beneficial for all.
• Democratic Transformation: Both leaders supported social transformation through democratic and peaceful means, rejecting violent overthrow. 
  • Ambedkar sought peaceful rehabilitation of the oppressed classes to address social disharmony.
• Target Groups and Communication: Gandhi communicated in the local vernacular, while Ambedkar spoke in English. Their target groups differed, converging at certain points.
• Legal and Moral Approaches: Gandhi’s principle included disobeying the law to make it more just, expressed through non-cooperation, hartal, satyagraha, and civil disobedience. 
  • Ambedkar leaned towards the observance of law and constitutionality in the political process.
• Integration vs. Minority Status: Gandhi considered untouchables integral to the Hindu whole, while Ambedkar saw them as a religious minority, preferring the terms ‘political minority’ or ‘minority by force.’ 
  • Ambedkar’s exhaustive study focused on historical angles, advocating solving untouchability through laws and constitutional methods. Gandhi viewed it as a moral stigma, seeking erasure through acts of atonement.

Conclusion

Gandhi’s campaign against untouchability and his views on caste reveal his deep commitment to social reform within the framework of Hinduism. Despite ideological differences with contemporaries like Ambedkar, Gandhi sought to cleanse Hindu society of untouchability through persuasion and non-violence. His efforts laid the groundwork for integrating marginalized communities into the broader nationalist movement, fostering social upliftment while navigating complex ideological landscapes.

DOWNLOAD PDF