No.145 17

New Buddhism forNew Aspirations

Navayana Buddhism of Ambedkar andHis Followers� Virginia Hancock

Ambedkar wrote The Buddhaand His Dhamma with theintent of creating a single

text for new Buddhists to readand follow. His introduction outlinesfour ways in which previousunderstandings of Buddhist doctrineare lacking:� The Buddha could not have had

his first great realization simplybecause he encountered an oldman, a sick man, and a dying man.It is unreasonable and thereforefalse to assume that the Buddhadid not have previous knowledgeof something so common.

� The Four Noble truths “make thegospel of the Buddha a gospel ofpessimism.” If life is composed

entirely of suffering then there isno incentive for change.

� The doctrines of no-soul, karma,and rebirth are incongruous. It isillogical to believe that there can bekarma and rebirth without a soul.

� The monk’s purpose has notbeen presented clearly. Is hesupposed to be a “perfect man”or a “social servant”?As these rather sweeping

critiques of Buddhism suggest,Ambedkar was comfortable in therole of consciously restructuring hischosen religion to meet the needs ofthe Dalit community he spoke for.1

Several scholars have remarkedupon and analyzed this aspect of

This article begins with an overview of Navayana Buddhism from two perspectives, that ofAmbedkar himself, based on his “Buddhist gospel” The Buddha and His Dhamma, and that ofpractioners in Maharashtra, based available academic scholarship. In the case of Ambedkar’sunderstanding of Buddhism, I will focus mostly on the changes he made to more traditionalpresentations of Buddhism.In the case of Maharashtran practitioners, I will attempt to draw some broad conclusionsabout their relationship to this relatively new religion. The centrality of the figure of Ambedkarin Navayana Buddhism, as well as Navayana Buddhist’s lack of conformity with Ambedkar’sunderstanding of Buddhist principles as articulated in The Buddha and His Dhamma, willguide me in my conclusions about the ways outside observers might want to move forwardin the study of this relatively new religion.

No.145 18

N a v a y a n aBuddhism. Forexample, AdeleFiske andC h r i s t o p hE m m r i c hundertook adetailed analysis

of Ambedkar’s use of the traditionalBuddhists texts in Pali in writing TheBuddha and His Dhamma.2 Fiskeand Emmrich examined Ambedkar’sreferences in the original version ofThe Buddha and His Dhamma anddescribe patterns of alteration fromthe presentation of Buddhism in thePali canon that they characterize asomission, change in emphasis andchanged meaning throughinterpolation or interpretation.3

Following are examples of thetype of changes Ambedkar made totraditional presentations of theBuddha’s teachings and the way inwhich these changes might supportDalit activism.

Ambedkar’s first majorreinterpretation involves theBuddha’s reununciation of worldlylife. Whereas traditional biographiesof the Buddha emphasize theempathy the young prince felt whenhe first encountered humansufferring, Ambedkar highlights thestrength of the Buddha’s socialconscience during a conflict overwater rights. According toAmbedkar, the Buddha advocated arational and peaceful resolution ofan inter-tribe water conflict but wasunable to gain the necessary politicalleverage because he lacked majorityvote. He then went into exile andbecame a renunciant because it wasthe only way to prevent his tribefrom going to war with theirneighbors. Ambedkar omits anymention of old age, sickness, anddeath (the forms of suffering theBuddha is usually understood to

have encountered). In this way theBuddha’s renunciation is motivatedmore by political exigencies ratherthan a desire to find the ultimate truth,and he becomes a figure not unlike aminority politician in contemporaryIndia. The discussion of water rightswas also a familiar topic after theMahad Satyagraha. These changes,though unorthodox, create acharacter for the Buddha that mightbe easily understood by oppressedcommunities, specifically Dalits.

The Four Noble TruthsAmbedkar interprets the Four

Noble truths similarly. Hisdescription of the first sermon at DeerPark follows:

“The centre of his Dhamma isman and the relation of man to manin his life on earth. This [the Buddha]said was his first postulate. Hissecond postulate was that men areliving in sorrow, in misery and

poverty. The world is full of sufferingand how to remove this sufferingfrom the world is the only purposeof Dhamma. Nothing else is Dhamma.The recognition of the existence ofsuffering and to show the way toremove suffering is the foundationand basis of his Dhamma…Areligion which fails to recognise thisis no religion at all…The Buddhathen told them that according to hisDhamma if every person followed (1)the Path of Purity; (2) the Path ofRighteousness; and (3) the Path ofvirtue, it would bring about the endof all suffering.”4

Ambedkar makes severalobvious changes to early Buddhistdoctrine. The first Noble Truth thatlife is suffering becomes the “secondpostulate,” and the most importantcharacteristic of Buddhism becomesits concern for human relationships.The second Noble Truth, thatsuffering arises from mental craving,is also described in social terms as“sorrow, misery and poverty.” Inturn he refers to the third Noble Truthregarding the cessation of sufferingas the “removal of suffering.”Christopher Queen’s detailedanalysis of Ambedkar’s presentationof the Four Noble Truths reveals stillmore ways in which they have beenaltered to create a message of socialactivism. Queen notes that as theBuddha’s teachings continue itbecomes clear that the Path of Purityis the Five Precepts, the Path ofRighteousness is the Eightfold Path,and the Path of Virture is the TenParamitas , or perfections.5 YetAmbedkar does not present any ofthese concepts in their traditionalformat. The goal of the EightfoldPath, for example, is “to removeinjustice and inhumanity that mandoes to man,” rather than nirvana.6

Nirvana itself is then described as:(1) a fundamental understanding

(In Ambedkar’s view)Buddha’s renunciationis motivated more by

political exigencies ratherthan a desire find theultimate truth and he

becomes a figurenot unlike a minority

politician incontemporary India.

(Ambedkar’s) EightfoldPath, for example, is

to remove injustice andinhumanity that mandoes to man...thereis a distinct elementof anti-Brahmanism

in Ambedkar’srendering of the

Four Noble Truths.

No.145 19

“that there wassuffering in theworld, and (2) ap r o a c t i v eknowledge of“how to removethis sufferingand makem a n k i n d

happy.”7

Buddhism and the CasteSystem

These changes speak specificallyto Dalits in a number of ways. First,there is a distinct element of anti-Brahmanism in Ambedkar’s renderingof the Four Noble Truths. “Nothingelse is Dhamma,” he states, and “areligion which fails to recognize thisis no religion at all.” AlthoughAmbedkar does not criticize otherreligions in this section—as he doesin other chapters of the book—thisand other statements bear closeresemblance to his earlier attack onHinduism. Here, Ambedkar againlegitimizes the use of Buddhism tooppose traditions that areunsatisfactory. Second, as Queennotes, Ambedkar seems to believethat the traditional presentation ofsuffering—which places the “blame”on the cravings of each individual—would alienate Buddhism from thesocially and politically oppressed.8

Thus suffering is described in

transitory, but more graphic, termsas “sorrow”, “misery”, and“poverty.” These largely socialconditions are remedied quitedifferently from the traditionalBuddhist understanding of sufferingas an intricate network of mentalcravings. This change also speaksof the fact that the traditional focuson craving might have lent itself tomanipulation by people in power,who could advocate renunciationinstead of response to the materiallybased claims of the dispossessed.Third, by placing the Four NobleTruths, the Eightfold Path, and theTen Perfections in a social contexthe provides religious justification forpeoples’ social movements. Lastly,and perhaps most importantly, hisdefinition of nirvana is not onlyeasily understandable but alsotheoretically attainable within asingle lifetime.Concept of Rebirth and the

Role of the MonkAmbedkar’s explanation of

karma and rebirth further legitimizesboth the source and the goal of socialaction. He defends the concept ofrebirth but changes the concept ofthe soul. Each time a person is rebornhis or her soul is divided andrecombined with parts of many otherpeoples’ souls. There is thus nosingle soul that is reborn over andover again.9 In this way Ambedkarestablishes that there is noinheritance of traits from one lifetimeto the next—a direct rebuttal to thewidespread views of caste. This inturn negates the idea that currentsocial injustices are a result of pastmisdeeds and assures Dalit convertsthat their new framework does notcontain the possibility for religiouslysanctioned hierarchy. He alsoexplains that karma works onlywithin one lifetime and cannot affectfuture lives.10 A this-worldly

emphasis on karma gives addedsignificance to societal changes, aseach life is now a unique andunrepeatable opportunity for changeand growth. Whereas traditionalconceptions of karma and rebirthrender material changes insignificanton a cosmological scale, Ambedkar’sreinterpretation implies that suchchanges actually have ultimateimportance. In this way oppressedpeoples are vindicated in their senseof social outrage and are informedonce again of the importance ofpolitical or social struggle.

Ambedkar’s reinterpretation ofthe role of the monk provides a finalillustration that Buddhism takes aproactive stance towards radicalchange. Monks should not becontent merely to serve society—they are instead the activeparticipants and creators of history.He writes that the bhikkhu’s dutiesare to proselytize for Buddhism andserve the laity. The bhikkhu iscommanded specifically to “fight tospread Dhamma.”11 “We wage war,O disciples, therefore we are calledwarriors.” Ambedkar’s Buddha tellshis disciples, “Where virtue is indanger do not avoid fighting, do notbe mealy-mouthed.”12 Monks are nothermetic ascetics who are focusedon the attainment of otherworldlystates. Rather they constitute thedriving force behind a revolution inmind and body.

Ambedkar establishesthat there is no

inheritance of traitsfrom one lifetime to thenext—a direct rebuttalto the Gandhian viewof caste. This in turnnegates the idea that

current social injusticesare a result

of past misdeeds.

Ambedkar’s Buddha tellshis disciples, “Where

virtue is in danger do notavoid fighting, do not bemealy-mouthed.” Monksare not hermetic ascetics

who are focused onthe attainment of

otherworldly states.

No.145 20

Ambedkar’s Buddhism inPractice

The Buddhismone finds in dailylife and practicecan differsignificantly fromthe principlesdescribed in TheBuddha and hisDhamma.13 These

differences vary according tolocation andsocioeconomicsituationand range from minutereinterpretations to fundamentalcontradictions. Polarizing conceptsinclude karma, rebirth, dharma,meditation, spirituality, materialism,politics, individuality and socialaction. Varying social categoriesinclude the urban, rural, educated,uneducated, and in many cases, oldand young. Thus, on the one handforms of Navayana Buddhist practicecan differ from each other quitesignificantly in terms of both form andcontent. This will be illustratedthrough a simple comparisonbetween certain studies of ruralBuddhists and members of theTBMSG. On the other hand, thefigure of Ambedkar provides a clearand unifying link between differentBuddhist practitioners.

Buddhism in Two RuralVillages

Two studies of rural villages inMaharashtra show that differencesbetween Navayana Buddhism andAmbedkar’s understanding ofBuddhism can stem more from theinevitable overlap of religion andculture than from the type ofconscious religious reconstructionthat Ambedkar engaged in. One mustnot extrapolate their conclusions ontothe rest of the Navayana Buddhistcommunity; however the picturepresented is useful in gaining a sense

she documents the persistence oftraditional Hindu concepts of karma,dharma, and the transmigration of thesoul.18

Burra characterizes the religiouspractice of rural Mahars asfundamentally Hindu with a Buddhistexterior. For example, she describeshow the premarriage activities of theMahars are still Hindu (one exampleis matching horoscopes), yet themarriage ceremony itself consists ofplacing garlands over the bride andgroom as they stand in front ofpictures of Ambedkar and theBuddha.19 This dichotomy betweenprivate Hindu practice and publicBuddhist practice marks other ritualsas well.

At the same time, Burra notes thatNavayana Buddhists now participatewith great enthusiasm in Hindufestivals and ceremonies that werepreviously forbidden to them.20 Thisand other positive changes leave herwith the conclusion that the DalitBuddhist movement is a “symbol ofidentity transformation” rather thana true religious conversion.21 “TheBuddhist identity is important mainlyfor the outside world,” she writes,“There is an attempt to emphasizeone’s distinctiveness and this isachieved by different methods. Theinner core may remain Hindu but thisin no way reflects a betrayal of thecause.”22 Thus rural Dalit Buddhistpractice is distinguished from otherforms of Buddhism primarily by itscontinued reliance on Hindu themesand rituals.23

This seems to suggest that themany radical departures fromAmbedkar’s message are caused bya blurred distinction between Hinduculture and Indian culture. Even thebeginning of Ambedkar’s politicalcareer was marked by ambivalenceabout what constitutes Hinduism

of the range of Navayana Buddhistpractice.

For example, Timothy Fitzgeraldconcludes that although ruralMahars have begun to refuse toperform traditional duties such asscavenging and have given up thepractice of eating beef, theirrecognition and practice of sub-castehierarchy and untouchability, lack ofintercaste marriage, and worship ofHindu gods and goddesses isevidence that they practice “the kindof Buddhism which has not reallychanged anybody or anything veryradically.”14

Neera Burra’s study of village lifeprovides different detail. She notesthat although 70 out of the 102respondents to her researchquestionnaire classified themselvesas Buddhist, none of them had takenAmbedkar’s 22 vows.15 She arguesthat this reflects both a lack ofknowledge about the vows and ageneral hesitancy to take oaths thatcharacterizes rural society.16 Additionally, there were statues ofHindu gods and goddesses—alongside pictures of Ambedkar andthe Buddha—in every household shevisited.17 Over half of the people sheinterviewed said that they prayed toall gods, including Hindu deities, and

Dalit Buddhist movementis a “symbol of identitytransformation” rather

than a truereligious conversion.

“The Buddhist identityis important mainly for

the outside world,”...Theinner core may remain

Hindu but this in noway reflects a betrayal

of the cause.”

No.145 21

and whatc o n s t i t u t e sI n d i a nculture.24 Forexample hepart icipated,a l b e i tmarginally, in atemple entry

campaign—even as he denouncedBrahmans and traditional Hindureligiosity in writings such asAnnihilation of Caste. It shouldtherefore come as no surprise thatsome rural Buddhists have used theirnewfound self-confidence to engagein traditionally Hindu forms ofworship, as many societal roles thatare available for reclamation are alsorelated to Hinduism in some way.

International LinkagesThe TBMSG is the Indian branch

of the international Buddhistorganization named the Friends ofthe Western Buddhist Order(FWBO), founded in London bySangharakshita in 1967. The FWBOdescribes its purpose as “return[ing]to the basic principles of Buddhismand find[ing] ways of living them outin the context of the modernWest.”25 The FWBO becameinvolved in the Indian Buddhistmovement, particularly inMaharashtra, when several membersof its order came to India to teachBuddhism in the late 1970’s. TheTBMSG now has twenty centreslocated throughout India and runs anetwork of social servicesorganizations.

Fitzgerald goes so far as to assertthat Buddhists who are associatedwith the TBMSG represent the more“spiritual” side of NavayanaBuddhism.26 Their interpretation ofBuddhism is compatible withAmbedkar’s because it emphasizesrationality, moral action, and social

reform. However, the TBMSG strivesfor total political nonpartisanshipand many of its members viewnirvana not in materialist terms butas a transcendent state of awareness.

Johannes Beltz’ study of theTBMSG in Maharashtra providesmore information on the type ofBuddhism that Fitzgerald seems tobe describing. He interviewedseveral members of the TBMSG at aretreat center outside Pune, many ofwho described a Buddhist messageof increased spirituality. For example,one practitioner explained:

“I was born Buddhist. But inreality, no one can be Buddhistwithout practicing the dhamma. Tobe Buddhist from birth is notpossible…I took refuge in theBuddha, the dhamma, and thesangha. I think that I am on the pathof the Buddha. I want to become adhammamitra (a lay leader in theTBMSG). A Buddhist is more than aphysical man. He is spiritual…Iwould like to become 100%Buddhist.”27

Another told him:“I consider myself Buddhist

because I believe not in God but inhumanity. I practice Buddhism. Iwant to positively develop mypersonality and helpothers…Through meditation, weaugment our state of consciousnessto become better men.”28

These statements embody thespirituality and humanism ofBuddhism as envisioned bySangharakshita, the founder of theFWBO. Meditation lies at the centerof individual practice, and onlythrough knowing oneself does oneenter a state where he or she trulybegins to help others. In addition,these practitioners negate amaterialistic understanding of theworld. “A Buddhist is more than aphysical man,” one states, “He is

spiritual.” This explains why “no onecan be Buddhist without practicingthe dhamma”: meditation and actionare two aspects of the same teaching,and to engage in one without theother is, according to the TBMSG,to ignore the meaning of Buddhism.

Several of the individuals Beltzinterviewed also made a distinctionbetween “Dalit Buddhists” who donot practice and “real Buddhists”who do. “The Dalit movementresults in bad social conditions foruntouchables,” one dhammachariasserts, “It is for politics. The Dalitmovement does not have a positiveapproach to Buddhism…Mypersonal experience is different. Ihave developed my personality. I donot call myself Dalit. I considermyself Buddhist.”29 An employee atthe University of Pune went so faras to state, “The leaders of the Dalitmovement are selfish and corrupt.They are demagogues and want tosuppress other currents of Buddhistthought. They waste a lot of energy,time, and money…The TBMSGserenely runs the Buddhistmovement and continues thework of Dr. Ambedkar withrespect….There is no love betweenthe activists.”30

Victory over CasteThe disparate practices of some

Maharashtran Buddhists offer acautionary statement for those whomay be eager to equate Ambedkar’sthinking about Buddhism directlywith that of Dalit communities.Ambedkar, Ambedkar’s Buddhism,and Buddhist communities aremerely the loci for numerous personaland communal interactions thatcomprise the forms of NavayanaBuddhism. In theory, The Buddhaand His Dhamma would serve as thephilosophical, ideological, andreligious template for Buddhists, andmy own experiences with Navayana

No.145 22

Buddhists inNew Delhiwould suggestthat this isi n d e e dpossible. As D.C. Ahir states,“The Buddhaand His

Dhamma is a true guide for all theBuddhists. It is the best basis forpropagating the Dhamma, at least inIndia”.31 There are plausible modelsthat would explain how a narrativetext such as The Buddha and HisDhamma could become the “justgovernance” for society thatAmbedkar holds a good religionshould be.32 However, the abovereview of scholarship suggests thatThe Buddha and His Dhamma doesnot occupy a central place in allNavayana Buddhists’ lives.

Given the differences inNavayana Buddhist practice, howare we to understand the religion asa whole? The element of NavayanaBuddhism that seeks to separateitself from Hinduism provides onelink between an uninformedadoption of Buddhism and analmost instantaneous increase inself-esteem and perception of self-worth. Even if converts do notremember each of Ambedkar ’stwenty-two vows, for example, theyare bound to remember the centraltheme of rejection of Hinduism.Thus many Dalit Buddhistsunderstand what Buddhism is notbefore they focus on what it is. The

conversion experience can bepowerful because the ideologicalvictory over caste is expressed inconcrete actions on the part of theconvert.

At the same time, however, theshift away from the Hindu castesystem is highly nuanced. AsBurra’s study shows, the Maharrejection of caste does not alwaysentail rejection of Hindusim. Whenthe rural Buddhist she studied alignthemselves with Buddhism they

An Exemplary ProphetLynch’s interest lies in

investigating why and howAmbedkar, a Mahar, was so fullyaccepted and integrated into Jatavculture. To this end, he providesseveral comparisons between Jatavmyths of origin and a new “myth oforigin” that was presented byAmbedkar. He views Ambedkar as aWeberian “exemplary prophet” whohas now become the “chief hero” ofthe myth that he himself created.33 Lynch seems to imply that the entire“Neo-Buddhist myth” isencapsulated by Ambedkar ’sexplanation of the origins of thecaste system and the way in whichDalits ended up at its bottom. Thiswould not hold true for otherBuddhist communities such as theTBMSG, however.

Alternatively, what if the figureof Ambedkar is the defining elementof Navayana Buddhism? Even suchdiffering communities as the ruralBuddhists examined and the TBMSGshare their veneration for him. Apublic debate between Gopal Guru,a Buddhist and professor at theUniversity of Pune, andDhammacari Lokamitra, a member ofthe TBMSG, supports thishypothesis. Though these menarticulated very different opinionsabout the relative weight of the“spiritual” versus the “political”aspects of Buddhism, they bothreturned to Ambedkar forjustification of their arguments.Lokamitra wrote, “I am afraid theproject Gopal Guru is talking aboutis not that of Ambedkar but of thosewho have attempted to useAmbedkar’s conversion to Buddhismto serve their own political ends”.34 Guru offered the following rejoinder:“Lokamitra and his TBMSG are freeto sell their package of spiritualBuddhism and synthesise it with

adopt a new social andpsychological paradigm that canoften be characterized foremost bythe victory of equality over caste;only secondary is the victory ofBuddhist practice over Hindupractice.

As another possibility, OwenLynch has applied an academicunderstanding of myth to thedevelopment of NavayanaBuddhism. He uses it to explain theway that Ambedkar became a culturalhero and icon of Buddhism for theJatavs in Agra, a group that hassignificant linguistic and culturaldifferences from the Mahars. Hesuggests that there is a “Neo-Buddhist” myth that providesmotivation and strategy for thecommunity it serves.

Even if converts did notremember...many DalitBuddhists understandwhat Buddhism is notbefore they focus on

what it is.

Mahar rejection ofcaste does not always

entail rejection ofHindusim... they adopt

a new social andpsychological paradigm

that is characterizedforemost by the victory ofequality over caste; only

secondary is the victory ofBuddhist practice over

Hindu practice.

No.145 23

anything butnot withA m b e d k a r ’sB u d d h i s m .Because it doesnot allow suchsynthes i s . ” 35

Both judged theo t h e r ’ s

reasoning as flawed specifically onthe grounds that it represents amisinterpretation of Ambedkar’smessage. As Guru acknowledged, hewas bothered not so much by theTBMSG’s false Buddhist doctrine ashe is by the fact that it has beenassociated with Ambedkar.

Ambedkar’s figure fills in thegaps that are left by the explanationsof origin and anti-Brahmanism. He isthe inspiration, motivation, andjustification for the Dalit Buddhistmovement. His life illustrates thepossibilities of the future, and sincehis death those possibilities havebecome the center of much ofcontemporary Navayana Buddhism.Ambedkar is in this view bothfounder and standard-bearer ofcontemporary Navayana Buddhism.Evaluation and Conclusions

In 1956 Dr. B. R. Ambedkar ledover 50,000 Dalits in a massconversion to Buddhism. This actwas the first of many massconversions of low cast Hindus toBuddhism. Today estimates rangefrom between three million and tenmillion Buddhists in India, most ofwhom are Dalit.36

For years there was littlescholarly material on Buddhism andthe Ambedkarite movement, save afew examples such as the pioneeringwork of the American historianEleanor Zelliot.37 Contrast this witha recent conference on IndicReligions in New Delhi held by theInternational Association of theHistory of Religions, where there

were two entire panels composed ofacademics prepared to speak of theirresearch on the subject “Dalits andBuddhism.” “Navayana”, “Dalit”,or “Ambedkarite” Buddhism(depending on who is speaking) isalso actively discussed by theworldwide “engaged Buddhist”community. The intellectualdiscourse surrounding Ambedkar’sunderstanding of Buddhism andthose who follow in his footstepshas now grown to the point where itis able to have a fruitful dialogueeven within itself.38

In turn, at this point it may beuseful for outside observers ofNavayana Buddhism to begin toconsider not only what NavayanaBuddhism is but also how and whywe should examine it.

First, a discussion of NavayanaBuddhist texts or canon must includeall of Ambedkar’s writing, not justThe Buddha and His Dhamma, as astarting point. As the aboveexamples highlight, Ambedkar’s lifeis usually viewed as the embodiment,rather than the vehicle, of theBuddha’s teachings. In theory,Ambedkar’s significance leads to thelogical conclusion that, just as mostBuddhists’ veneration of Ambedkaris not limited to the eventssurrounding his conversion, so toothe texts which are understood ascontributing to Navayana Buddhismshould not be limited to The Buddhaand His Dhamma. In practice, manyBuddhists already impart religioussignificance to Ambedkar’s otherpolitical and sociological works. Thisis readily apparent in D.C. Ahir’scommentary on the Round TableConference, for example, which viewsAmbedkar ’s comments as theembodiments of the principle ofRight Speech.39

Clearly this inclusive approachmay have its limits. Are we to view

Ambedkar’s doctoral dissertation atColumbia as religious texts? Likelynot. Nor do I propose to delineatehere between those texts that shouldbe included in a Navayana Buddhistcanon and those that should not.Rather this should be understood asan idea to generate discussion and ahelpful approach to the study ofAmbedkar’s Navayana Buddhism. Ibelieve, however, that Buddhistpractitioners will ultimately be thefinal arbiters in this matter.

Second, where are the studies ofurban, often professional, NavayanaBuddhists and the correspondingsurge in online Navayana Buddhistcommunities? In New Delhi, forexample, I came to know severalBuddhists whose meditationpractice and highly informedunderstanding of Ambedkar andBuddhism bears little resemblance tothe conversions described in somestudies of rural Buddhists. There isa need for scholarship of thesethriving Navayana Buddhistcommunities among those who doresearch in Marathi and Hindi. Thereare also online forums for NavayanaBuddhists and websites on Dalitrights that would provide valuablematerial for those doing work inEnglish.40

Third, an attempt to describeNavayana Buddhism through appealto the “essential” elements ofBuddhism that may exist in early textsmust be considered carefully. Surelythere are continuities betweentraditional understandings ofBuddhism and Ambedkar ’sreinterpretation, but whether or notthese constitute some “essential”Buddhism to be passed down frommovement to movement is unclear.Furthermore, stressing this aspect ofAmbedkar’s writing when analyzingit in the context of other Buddhisttraditions may be overly limiting. This

No.145 24

is not to denythe importanceof showing thatA m b e d k a r ’sinterpretationis, in manyw a y s ,legitimate fromthe standpoint

of the Buddha’s teachings. Such aproject is a necessary part ofreligious dialogue andreinterpretation. However, one mustnot lose sight of the “essential”Navayana when determining itsrelationship to “essential”Buddhism. In this sense it would bea shame if we fail to capitalize on itsmost salient characteristic: aconfident and rational departurefrom inherited patterns of thought.

Finally,the study of NavayanaBuddhism needs to be asinterdisciplinary as possible. Whylimit the study of NavayanaBuddhism to certain disciplineswhen Ambedkar himself wasunencumbered by the traditionalboundaries between political,personal, and spiritualempowerment? The modernBuddhist movement in India may beas fundamentally related toeconomics and development as it isto politics and religion. Take, forexample, Amartya Sen’s well-knownDevelopment as Freedom. Seen in

this light, Ambedkar’s project mightbe understood as a project of humandevelopment through religiousconversion.

Focusing for a moment on thesubject of religion and development,two additional suggestions can bemade. First, those who wish to studydevelopment in India might take theimpact of Navayana Buddhism intoaccount. Has conversion had asignificant material impact onpractitioners’ lives and if so, how?Given the fact that Ambedkar’s viewof religious conversion is integrallytied to his goals of social

identity as Dalit and the past andpresent connotations that areassociated with this. Although thusfar the body of writing that examinesAmbedkar and Navayana Buddhismhas been a positive developmentwith respect to Navayana Buddhism,perhaps now is a good time toremind ourselves that we must becareful not to intellectualizeNavayana Buddhism to the extentthat we lose sight of the fact that it isfundamentally a religion by and forthe politically and sociallyoppressed.

This paper was presented at the FirstConference on Religions in the IndicCivilisation organised in Delhi byCSDS and IAHR from December18-21, 2003

Endnotes1 See Christopher Queen, “Dr.

Ambedkar and the Hermeneutics ofBuddhist Liberation,” in EngagedBuddhism: Buddhist LiberationMovements in Asia, Ed. ChristopherS. Queen and Sallie B. (StateUniversity of New York Press 1996),45 for a useful analysis of Ambedkaras a modern or postmodern man.

2 See Adele Fiske and ChristophEmmrich, “The use of BuddhistScriptures in B. R. Ambedkar’s TheBuddha and His Dhamma”, inSurendra Jondhale and Johannes Beltz,eds., Reconstructing the World: B. R.Ambedkar and Buddhism in India(Oxford University Press 2004). Seealso Queen 48, and Richard Taylor,“The Ambedkarite Buddhists,” inAmbedkar and the Neo-BuddhistMovement, Ed. T.S. Wilkinson and M.M. Thomas (Christian LiteratureSociety 1972), 148.

3 Fiske and Emmrich, 10.

4 B. R. Ambedkar, “The Buddha and HisDhamma ,” in Dr. BabasahebAmbedkar Writings and Speeches, Vol.XXI, Comp. Vasant Moon (EducationDepartment of Maharashtra 1992),at 121-122.

5 Queen, 56.

6 See Queen, at 57.

7 Ibid.

We must be careful notto intellectualize

Navayana Buddhism tothe extent that we losesight of the fact that is

fundamentally a religionby and for the politicallyand socially oppressed.

One must not lose sightof the “essential”Navayana when

determining its relationshipto “essential” Buddhism.

Its most salientcharacteristic is a

confident and rationaldeparture from inherited

patterns of thought.

empowerment for Dalits, it seems likea missed opportunity not to considerthis religious movement within thegreater scheme of Indiandevelopment. This may be truedespite the oft-prevailing view ofreligion as an anathema toprogressive societal transformation.

Second, the context in whichNavayana Buddhist practice takesplace must not be forgotten byoutside observers. The picture ofhuman development for Dalits inIndia is stark. Although I wouldhesitate before projecting bleakcontours on the lives of all NavayanaBuddhist communities, it does seemsafe to assert that this is at least thegeneral context in which they live,and that even if many NavayanaBuddhists who are Dalits havegained upward social mobility theyare still aware of their distinct

No.145 25

8 Queen, 59.

9 Ambedkar, 333.

10 Ambedkar, 340.

11 Ambedkar, 447.

12 Ibid.

13 Note that the bulk of the research forthis paper was completed between May2000 and May 2001. Although I thinkthe main conclusions still hold, theremay be scholarship that is not includedhere and which would add additionalnuance to the picture portrayed.

14 Timothy Fitzgerald, “Buddhism inMaharashtra: a Tri-Partite Analysis—A Research Report,” in Dr. Ambedkar,Buddhism, and Social Change, Ed.A.K. Narain and D. C. Ahir (B. R.Publishing Corporation 1994), 20.

15 Neera Burra, “Buddhism, Conversionand Identity: A Case Study of VillageMahars”, in Caste: Its 20th CenturyAvatar, ed. M.N. Srinivas (PenguinIndia 1997), 160.

16 Ibid.

17 Ibid., 161.

18 Ibid., 161-62.

19 Ibid., 165.

20 Ibid., 166.

21 Ibid., 168.

22 Ibid.

23 Fitzgerald, 20.

24 See Gauri Viswanathan, Outside theFold: Religion, Modernity and

Belief (Princeton University Press1998), 235.

25 Friends of the Western Buddhist Order,“The FWBO and the BuddhistTradition”, available at http://www.fwbo.org/tradition.html.

26 Ibid., 23.

27 Johanez Beltz, “Spiritualiser leDhamma? L’implantation Contesteedu Trailokya Bauddha Mahasangha enInde,” Asiatische Studien EtudesAsiatiques 4 (1997),1055-1072.

28 Ibid., 1063.

29 Ibid., 1065.

30 Ibid., 1066.

31 D. C. Ahir, Buddhism and Ambedkar,(Dalit Sahitya Prakashan 1990), 110.

32 Charles Hallisey and Anne Hansen, forexample, provide a useful frameworkfor understanding the inner moraltransformation that result fromrepeated exposure to the Jataka tales.They hold that narrative has theunique ability to “prefigure,”“configure”, and eventually“transfigure” moral life. See CharlesHallisey and Anne Hansen,“Narrative, Sub-Ethics, and the MoralLife,” Journal of Religious Ethics 24.2(Fall 1996), 323.

33 Owen Lynch, “Dr. B. R. Ambedkar—Myth and Charisma,” TheUntouchables in Contemporary India,Ed. J. Michael Mahar (The Universityof Arizona Press 1972), 110.

34 Dhammachari Lokamitra,“Ambedkar and Buddhism,” Economic

and Political Weekly May 18, 1991,1304.

35 Gopal Guru, “AppropriatingAmbedkar”, Economic and PoliticalWeekly, July 6-13, 1991, 1699.

36 See Friends of the Western BuddhistOrder, “Reviving Buddhism in India”,available at http://www.fwbo.org/india.html.

37 See Eleanor Zelliot, FromUntouchable to Dalit: Essays on theAmbedkar Movement, 3 rd edition2001, Manohar, New Delhi. I alsowould like to thank Professor Zelliotfor her invaluable contributions tothis article, particularly through herunderstanding of the weaknesses andfuture strengths of scholarship onNavayana Buddhism.

38 See, e.g., Surendra Jondhale andJohannes Beltz, Reconstructing theWorld: B.R. Ambedkar and Buddhismin India, (Oxford University Press2004) and Gail Omvedt, Buddhism inIndia: Challenging Brahmanism andCaste (Sage Publications 2004).

39 See D. C. Ahir, Buddhism andAmbedkar (Dalit Sahitya Prakashan1990).

40 An example of an online forum is TheBuddhist Circle, at Yahoo! Groups.Websites include www.ambedkar.org,www.navayana.org, andwww.ambedkar.net. I would also like tothank Mangesh Dahiwale and the othermembers of The Buddhist Circle whowere a tremendous help and inspirationto me while I was living in New Delhi.�

Available from MANUSHIthree CDs containing six short films in Hindi

by Madhu Kishwar

THEMES

� Liquor & State Policy � India’s Traditional Technologists

� Dowry: Compulsion vs Need � Plight of Street Vendors and Cycle Rickshaw Pullers

� The Disinheritance of Women � Agriculture & Sarkari Controls

Duration: Half an hour each.

Price: Rs.1500 (for all six inclusive of postage in India)US$ 50 (Overseas) inclusive of airmail postage.