Ambedkar and Gandhi: Ideological Similarities & Differences | 14 Apr 2025

Source: IE 

Why in News?

As India reflects on the legacy of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, on his 135th birth anniversary, revisiting his ideas on caste, democracy, and social reform offers valuable insights for building an inclusive and just society.  

• His vision often converged with that of Mahatma Gandhi on the need for upliftment of the oppressed, yet differed sharply in approach.

What are the Key Areas of Ideological Convergence between B.R. Ambedkar and Mahatma Gandhi? 

• Rejection of Violent Revolution and Communism:  
  • Both Ambedkar and Gandhi opposed communism’s focus on class struggle and violence.  
    • Gandhi criticized "Bolshevism" for its violent methods, advocating non-violence and moral persuasion.  
    • Similarly, Ambedkar condemned communism for seeking "short cuts" to progress, stressing the need for a sustained, non-violent struggle for justice and equality. 
  • Ambedkar, in Buddha or Karl Marx (1956), prioritized Buddha's message of compassion and moral progress over Marxist coercion, while Gandhi emphasized non-violence as the highest principle, stating, "There is no road to peace, peace is the road." 
  • Gandhi emphasized that the means must align with the ends, rejecting the idea that "the ends justify the means."  
• Emphasis on Human Dignity and Social Justice: 
  • Both Gandhi and Ambedkar aimed for a just society grounded in dignity and compassion, though through different approaches.  
    • Gandhi focused on Sarvodaya (upliftment of all), while Ambedkar emphasized Bahujan Hitay (welfare of the majority). 
• Role of Ethics in Public Life: 
  • Both Gandhi and Ambedkar emphasized the importance of ethics in public life. Gandhi's politics were based on moral idealism, while Ambedkar, though a rationalist, recognized the role of ethics in governance.  
    • Both believed that character and morality were essential for public service and leadership. 
• Moral Politics: 
  • Initially, Ambedkar criticized Gandhi’s moral politics, calling them “hollow and noisy” and “dishonest.” However, later Ambedkar recognized the importance of individual morality, quoting Buddha on self-upliftment and non-violence, a principle similar to Gandhi’s vision of swaraj.

What were the Ideological Differences between Gandhi and Ambedkar? 

• Caste and Varna System: 
  • Ambedkar called for the total annihilation of caste and strongly criticized Hindu texts like Manusmriti for legitimizing caste oppression. In "Annihilation of Caste” (1936), he described the Hindu social order as a “veritable chamber of horrors.” 
    • Gandhi acknowledged the social harm caused by the caste system, but didn't fully reject Manusmriti as he considered the caste system as a distortion of true Hinduism, viewing the Manusmriti as a text with both valuable and flawed aspects.  
  • Gandhi opposed untouchability and initially supported a reformed varna system, later advocating for the abolition of caste in Harijan (1936), stating "caste has to go."  
    • He coined the term Harijans for Dalits, which Ambedkar rejected as patronizing. 
• Separate Electorates for Dalits: 
  • Ambedkar supported separate electorates for the Depressed Classes  to secure their political representation and rights. 
  • Gandhi opposed it, fearing it would divide Hindu society. His fast unto death led to the Poona Pact (1932), which replaced separate electorates with reserved seats for Dalits in joint electorates. 
    • In "What Congress and Gandhi Have Done to the Untouchables," Dr Ambedkar criticizes Gandhi and the Congress for failing to address the structural inequalities faced by Dalits.  
    • He argues that Gandhi's focus on moral reforms overlooked the need for legal and political measures to ensure Dalit emancipation. 
• Religion and Social Reform: 
  • Ambedkar saw Hinduism as inherently discriminatory and converted himself to Buddhism in 1956, advocating liberty, equality, and fraternity. 
  • Gandhi treated religion as a moral guide, championing Sarva Dharma Sambhava (equal respect for all religions), but his defense of some Hindu traditions (such as Varna system, the term Harijan for Dalits, and Manusmriti) was criticized by reformers like Ambedkar. 
    • While Gandhi, Aurobindo, and Tagore drew inspiration from Hinduism, Ambedkar’s ideas were rooted in Buddhism. 
  • Navayana Buddhism was founded by Ambedkar in 1956 as a Dalit Buddhist movement in India. 
• Means of Social Transformation: 
  • Ambedkar advocated for social reforms through legal and constitutional means, asserting that true political freedom could only be achieved after establishing social equality and justice. 
  • Gandhi emphasized personal morality, non-violence (ahimsa), and spiritual awakening (Swaraj) as means of societal transformation. 
• Role of the State and Constitution: 
  • Ambedkar supported state-led affirmative action to rectify historical injustices, emphasizing that "Democracy is not a form of government, but a form of social organization." 
  • Gandhi advocated for Gram Swaraj (village self-rule) and minimal state intervention, emphasizing community self-reliance and moral development over bureaucratic governance. 
• Economic Models: 
  • Ambedkar advocated for state socialism, planned development, and economic rights like land reforms and equal wages. He proposed state ownership of key industries in the States and Minorities memorandum (1947). 
  • Gandhi: Propounded trusteeship theory, where the wealthy act as custodians of public wealth. Favoured small-scale industries and swadeshi over Western industrialism. 

Conclusion 

Gandhi and Ambedkar, despite differing in methods, aimed for a just and inclusive India. Fundamental differences in means remained: Gandhi sought reform via moral appeal, while Ambedkar advocated for state-led social engineering. Together, their legacies offer a balanced lens to address caste, inequality, and democratic values today.