Dr. B. R. Ambedkar on Literature of
Brahminism
Mr. Mansing Vitthal Thombare
A Research Student,
Shivaji University, Kolhapur.
Dr.
B. R. Ambedkar, a prominent person of Indian Constitution, as a solicitor,
studied in several fields as multidisciplinary person. He wrote on a number of
subjects and issues of India and, here, the researcher’s emphasis on Dr.
Ambedkar’s critical view on literature of Brahaminism such as The Bhagvat
Geeta, The Mahabharata, The Ramayana, The Vedant Sutras,
and The Puranas. The researcher intends to find out conclusions of Dr.
Ambedkar which he was finding from the above literary works which is based on
virtues and philosophy of Hinduism and Buddhism. In his writings and speeches
which were compiled in Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches
Vol.3, by Prof. Hari Narake, Dr. Ambedkar has discussed the Literature of
Brahminism or religious texts of Hindus.
Some of the religious texts of
Hindus were discussed or studied or analyzed by Dr. Ambedkar on the basis of
three questions: 1) When did the work compose?, 2) Who is the author of the
text?, and 3) Which is the original or additional part of the book? Now we are
going to discuss the books as Dr. Ambedkar analyzed respectively.
The Bhagvat Geeta is a great
religious book to Hindus, a conversation between Lord Krishna and his disciple
Arjuna. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar stated:
…there is a
difference of opinion regarding the date of the composition of the Bhagwat
Gita, there is no difference of opinion that the Bhagwat Gita has
gone through many editions. All share the conviction that the Bhagwat Gita
has not reached us in its original form but has undergone essential
transformations at the hands of different editors who have added to it from
time to time. It is equally clear that the editors through whose hands it has
gone were not of equal calibre.[i]
As Prof. Garbe points out:
“The Gita is
certainly ‘no artistic work which the all comprehending vision of a genious has
created.’ The play of inspiration is indeed often times perceptible; not seldom,
however, there are merely high-sounding, empty words with which an idea that
has been already quite often explained, is repeated; and occasionally the
literary expression is exceedingly faulty. Verses are bodily taken over from
the Upanishad literature, and this is certainly what a poet filled with
inspiration would never have done. The workings of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas are
systematized with a truly Indian pedantry, and much indeed besides this could
be brought forward to prove that the Gita is not the product of a genuinely
poetic creative impulse...”[ii]
Dr.
Ambedkar has found different editions of The Bhagvat Geeta and shocked
by finding that every edition is different with additions of new virtues and
thoughts by different editors; he said that what parts of Geeta are
original and what parts of Geeta are additions subsequently made. No
doubt, it’s a good preaching text but a question is raised about its
originality. Dr. Ambedkar has concluded that much of part of Geeta was
derived from Buddhism as per his readings and evidences which he has provided
in the text.
Another
question is raised here about who is the author of The Bhagvat Geeta? As
we know it’s a conversation, between Krishna and Arjuna as Krishan propounds
his philosophy to Arjuna at the battle field in The Mahabharata, is
reported by Sanjaya –a man, with supernatural power of seeing everything
happened at the battle field without visiting the place- to Dhritrashtra
–father of Kaurawas. One may say that Vyas is the author of The Bhagvat
Geeta; because Vyas asks Sanjaya to report to Dhritarashtra.
Vedic
literature, a base of all the philosophy of Hindus or Literature of
Brahminism, consists two parts/mimansa: 1) Purva Mimansa (early parts)-
literature which deals with religious observances and rites and ceremonies is
called Karma Kanda, which includes- i) Vedas, and ii) the Brahamanas; and 2)
Uttara Mimansa (later parts)- literature which deals with the knowledge about
god to use the vedic equivalence is called Gnana Kanda, which includes- i) the
Aranyaks, and ii) Upanishadas.
Again a
question is raised about author of The Vedant Sutras- Jaimini or
Badaratana? Dr. Ambedkar has found five commentaries on The Vedant Sutras
by-
1) Shankaracharya- absolute monism
2) Ramanujanacharya- qualified monism
3) Nimarkacharya- mono dualism
4) Madhavacharya- dualism
5) Vallabhacharya- Pure monism
With
these references, Dr. Ambedkar inferences that some of them are stated complete
oneness between god and individual’s soul; and some of them signified that the
world is an illusion. Then again confusion is raised about its philosophy and
originality of the text.
The
Mahabharata is a religious book of Hindus and nearly all of us well known
of its story. Dr. Ambedkar discussed these Hindu religious books based on the
three questions. There are three editions of the book The Mahabharata with
different titles and by different authors/editors. First edition was published
as Jaya (Victory) by Vyasa; next one titled as Vaishampayana by
Vaishampayana, a disciple of Vyasa; last one was titled as The Mahabharata
by Sauti, another disciple of Vyasa. The number of shlokas were increasing by
every edition from 8800 shlokas to 96836 shlokas till the last edition which
clearly shows that new additions in the text which may be lost of originality
of the text.
The
Ramayana is a story of a war between Rama and Ravana, over the abduction of
Rama’s wife Sita by Ravana. By The Puranas, we can say Rama is an awtar of God
as Krishna in Mahabharata. It is a fact that like Mahabharata, the
Ramayana has also gone through three editions. There are two sorts of
references to the Ramayana in the Mahabharata. In
one case the reference is to Ramayana without any mention of the author.
The other reference is to the Ramayana of Valmiki. But the present Ramayana
is not the Ramayana of Valmiki. In the opinion of Mr. C. V. Vaidya:
“That the present Ramayana,
even as it is approved and adopted by the searching and all-respected
commentator Kataka, is not the Ramayana originally written by Valmiki,
not even the most orthodox thinker will be disposed to doubt. Whoever even
cursorily reads the poem, cannot but be struck with the inconsistencies, the
severances of connections, juxtapositions of new and old ideas which abound so greatly
in the present Ramayana, whether we take the Bengal or the Bombay text
of it. And one cannot but come to the conclusion that the Ramayana of
Valmiki was substantially reconstructed at some subsequent date.”[iii]
The last
book was discussed by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar is The Puranas- five
subjects were discussed in the book- 1) Sarga- creation of the universe, 2)
Prati sarga- dissolution of the universe, 3) Vamsh- geneology, 4) Manavtar-
ages of different Manus:14 successive sovereign of the earth, and 5)
Vamshacharitra- the account of royal dynasties. Dr. Ambedkar concluded:
This short survey
is enough to remove any doubt as to the age of this literature that it is
post-Buddhistic. The survey establishes one more point of great significance.
This literature arose during the period subsequent to the triumph of Brahmins
under the leadership of Pushyamitra. The survey brings out one other point.
Vyas writes Mahabharata. Vyas tells Bhagwat Gita, and Vyas
also writes the Puranas. Mahabharata contains 18 Parvas, the
Gita has 18 Adhyayas and the Puranas number 18. Is all this an Accident?
Or is it the result of a design planned and worked out in concert? We must wait
and see.[iv]
To
conclude, the present study is emphasized on criticism of literature of
Brahminism by Dr. Ambedkar. One more statement of Dr. Ambedkar, the researcher
intends to show here, about The Bhagvat Geeta:
The question will
no doubt be asked: What is the Bhagvat Gita if it is not a
gospel? My answer is that the Bhagvat Gita is neither a
book of religion nor a treatise on philosophy. What the Bhagvat Gita
does is to defend certain dogmas of religion on philosphic grounds. If on that
account anybody wants to call it a book of religion or a book of philosophy.[v]
Dr. Ambedkar has proved many things wrong which were
found in all these literary works such as composition dates, authors and its
originality. In The Mahabharata, adhyaya 190, it was found that
the words ‘mlenchas’ (muslims) and ‘vrashalas’ (Bhikshus in Buddhism) are
parallel in meanings in Buddhism which inferenced The Bhagavatgeeta
is borrowed from Buddhism in form of different words only but meanings and
preaching are same doctrines. Dr. ambedkar stated:
The Bhagvat Gita discusses Bramha-Nirvana. The steps by which
one reaches Bramha. Nirvana are stated by the Bhagvat Gita to be (1) Shraddha
(Faith in oneself); (2) Vyavasaya (Firm determination); (3) Smriti
(Rememberance of the goal); (4) Samadhi (Earnest contemplation) and (5) Prajna
(Insight or True Knowledge). From where has the Gita borrowed
this Nirvana theory? Surely it is not borrowed from the Upanishads. For no
Upanishad even mentions the word Nirvana. The whole idea is peculiarly Buddhist
and is borrowed from Buddhism. Anyone who has any doubt on the point may
compare this Bramha-Nirvana of the Bhagvat Gita with the Buddhist conception of
Nirvana as set out in the Mahapari-nibbana Sutta. It will be found that they
are the same which the Gita has laid down for Bramha-Nirvana. Is it not a fact
that the Bhagvat Gita has borrowed the entire conception of
Brmhma Nirvana instead of Nirvana for no other reason except to conceal the
fact of its having stolen it from Buddhism?[vi]
That is indirectly to state that the Geeta is clearly
borrowed from Buddhism.
Dr.
Ambedkar’s intension was not merely to compare Hinduism with Buddhism but also
it was to show that human being is a topmost religion in the world and we have
to use doctrines from our religious literary works as guidance for how to live
a life peacefully. Religions are for us and we are not for religion that is
main teaching from Dr. Ambedkar in his present discussion. For readers, Dr.
Ambedkar stated:
Any one who reads
the dialogue will notice the following points:
(1) The questions
put by Arjuna are not philosophical questions. They are natural
questions put by a worldly man faced with worldly problems.
(2) Upto a point
Krishna treats them as natural questions and returns to them quite natural
replies.
(3) The dialogue
takes a new turn. Arjuna after having informed Krishna positively and
definitely that he will not fight, suddenly takes a new turn and expresses a
doubt whether it is a good to kill the Kauravas or be killed by them.This is a
deliberate departure designed to give Krishna a philosophical defence of war,
uncalled for by anything said by Arjuna.
(4) Again there is
a drop in the tone of Krishna from verses 31 to 38. He treats the question as
natural and tells him to fight because it is the duty of the Kshatriya to
fight.
Anyone can see from
this that the introduction of the Vedanta philosophy is quite unnatural and
therefore a later intrusion.[vii]
Dr.
Ambedkar’s view on literature of Brahminism is about the discussion of
similarities between Hinduism and Buddhism and Buddhism is older than Hinduism
as per his references were given in the text. Mostly of the philosophy from
Hinduism is derived from Buddhism.
Refrences:
Narake, Prof. Hari. Dr. Babasaheb
Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches Vol.3. Education Department, Govt. of Maharashtra1987.
[i] Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar : Writings and Speeches. p. 245.
[iii] The Riddle of the Ramayana Chap. II. p. 6.
[iv] Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar : Writings and Speeches. p. 257.
[v] Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar : Writings and Speeches. p. 361.
[vi] Max Muller Mahapari-Nibbana Sutta p. 63.
[vii] Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar : Writings and Speeches. p. 377.
