Some facts are often overlooked by those who are in a habit of over-exploiting the statement - “Though I was born a Hindu, I solemnly assure you that I will not die as Hindu” - of Dr. Ambedkar. This statement showing an unwavering determination for conversion was given by Dr. Ambedkar in 1939. Isn’t that intriguing to notice that he formally adopted Buddhism only in 1956 - after more than 20 years of his explicitly expressing this intention? Unfortunately he left us only after a few months of his converting to Buddhism, without explaining the real reason behind this inordinate delay. If allowed to extrapolate, how wrong will it be to assert that he only tried to keep his words that apparently he was not very keen to? Otherwise, what kept him postponing the implementation of his plans and made him wait for 20 long years?
To say that he
was not being allowed to take a call, will be an exhibition of dishonesty. Those
days, Hinduism was not known for offering any ‘external’ pressure on those who
intended to convert and people kept themselves away from pressures of
conversion following entirely their own convictions. Instead, Hinduism was
known to offer resistances through a strategy of non-acceptance to those who
wanted to convert back. Isn’t the choice of ‘Buddhism’ also baffling? Wasn’t
that one of the most ‘friendliest’ to Hinduism - available to him at that time?
Wasn’t Dr. Ambedkar aware of the fact that outside this country, people were
used to identifying all non-Muslims - primarily as Hindus? Didn’t his
nationalist urge encourage him to choose Buddhism as compared to Islam and
Christianity? In this analysis however, I find communists in a contradicting
self-defeating cameo role. They have intended to exploit the legacy of Dr. Ambedkar
in a rather dishonest manner. Like Ambedkar even communists are also known for expressing
their extreme dislike for Hinduism but they are known to showcase ‘Islam’ as a
better option. Their dishonesty however becomes evident as, only when they get cornered,
they argue that they are against all religions but unlike Ambedkar their
selectively use of ‘Islam’ against Hinduism to prove a point is the obvious
contradiction between the two approaches. Ambedkar's approach was positive - to
find solutions within us whereas Communists' approach is entirely
negative - to ensure destruction.
To conclude, Dr.
Ambedkar was born a Hindu and yes, he died not as a Hindu, but it would be
difficult to challenge an assertion that he actually preferred living as a Hindu.
Ambedkar’s approach was that of a reformer’s whereas Communists’ approach has
been of a destructor’s.
No comments:
Post a Comment