April 11, 2004

Gail Omvedt, a prolific writer, is currently a senior fellow at the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, and she is also the research director of the Krantivit Trust. Her book is a most conscientious and detailed exploration of 2,500 years of Buddhism, Brahmanism and caste in India, revealing much to both scholar and seeker. Clearly, many believe that the giant on the Indian stage after Buddha himself in this context is Dr Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, who was born a Mahar, a particularly vigorous untouchable community in the state of Maharashtra. Dr Omvedt focuses in great depth on his ‘audacity’ in turning upside down some important aspects of the Buddhist religion. She is at pains to prove that certain of his ideas may be said to have their roots in the Buddhist canon.

To gain her insights the author has gone through an intensive reading of translations of Pali literature, looked at interpretations of these, and used the perspective for a re-study of the history of ancient India.

Ambedkar was convinced that Brahmanism was responsible for keeping both dalits and India backward, and came to believe that Buddhism was its main potential alternative. He held that Buddhism was not simply spirituality, but a rational and psychologically orientated dharma or teaching designed to help humans live in this world, and to make it free of dukkha or sorrow. Dr Omvedt says, on the other hand, “His denial that dukkha... was central to Buddhism comes from his acceptance of the widespread notion that the idea involves a pessimistic view of the world and leads to escapism. Ambedkar... was ready to deny what many (including most of the earliest Buddhists) have seen as the essence of Buddhism.” (p5)

This essence is contained in the four noble truths, which state that there is pain and suffering in life, that there is a cause for pain and suffering, that these things have an ending, and that there is a path leading to their end.

In line with this, he also rejects the cause and effect idea in karma, plus the notion of samsara, which is to most Buddhists the necessary process of countless reincarnations that bring us eventually to nirvana. Along with some other scholars, he argues that nirvana can be achieved in this life through ethical practice and freedom from desire. However, as Dr Omvedt points out, earning good karma in this way does not necessarily lead to enlightenment, the prime condition for entering nirvana.

Ambedkar’s progress towards his final ceremonial conversion to Buddhism, along with 400,000 other dalits in Nagpur, is related in great detail, and naturally describes his crossing swords with Mahatma Gandhi, including much also on his examination of Marxism as the solution to the dalits’ problems. To him Buddhism and Marxism were similar in valuing material prosperity as good, but differed in their approach to equality and social justice.

In her chapter on dharma, the author discusses amongst other things the ethicization of karma, the self and the cosmos, the sangha (monastic community) and society, respect for labour, and the position of women, Brahmans and caste. (Male chauvinists will be delighted to read that Buddha admitted with great reluctance that women were fit to enter the sangha, and laid down stringent rules defining their subordinate position therein.) She contrasts the Brahmanic idea with Buddhism (p63) by saying, “Whereas the Brahmans ritualized the earlier religious teachings, Buddha took the main ideological framework of his time, the karma —rebirth frame, and ethicized it.” This, she feels, is the unique contribution of Buddhism towards the remodeling of society.

In chapter 4, the author delves further into the effect of Buddhism on civilization, its relationship to caste and its origins, and the fascinating question of how religious-philosophical systems either encourage or block the development of science and technology. This religious philosophy, she says, with its emphasis on discourse and logical thinking, rather than imposing an unquestioning acceptance of tradition, played a major role in promoting science, especially medicine.

Concerning the defeat of Buddhism in India, she reveals that Buddha himself had foretold its eclipse, but rubbishes what she calls the “facile generalizations” of A.L. Basham and others for their lack of historical evidence. We are treated to a most faithful account of the findings of Hsuan Tsang, who in the 7th century documented carefully the state of Buddhism in many parts of India. Then on the role of Islam, generally believed to have dealt the final blow to Buddhism, she states, “Both were competitors on important issues. Both were universal religions... Both were connected with commerce and trade... Buddhism discouraged militarism more than either Islam or Christianity, yet their confrontation was no less profound, not because of their difference, but because of their similarities...” And she believes that Brahmanism, being inward looking, did not offer the same challenge to Islam.

She concludes by saying that the Navayana Buddhism of Ambedkar can certainly find a genuine base in Gautama’s teachings, and serve as a powerful force for reconstructing society in a new and changing millennium. Reading this book is an enriching experience, not only because of the wealth and variety of information, and its interpretation and setting into perspective, but also because of the intellectual honesty which shines through it all like a beacon.

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)