Why Dr. B.R.Ambedkar Was Against Hero Worship?

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s Criticism of Hero Worship of Mahatma Gandhi

Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar and Mahatma Gandhi were two towering figures of India’s freedom struggle, each playing a crucial role in shaping the country’s socio-political landscape. However, their relationship was complex, marked by ideological differences and contrasting worldviews. One of the key points of divergence was Dr. Ambedkar’s criticism of the hero worship surrounding Mahatma Gandhi. Ambedkar believed that idolizing political leaders, including Gandhi, posed significant dangers to democracy, equality, and social justice.

Ambedkar’s Philosophy Against Hero Worship

Dr. Ambedkar consistently warned against the practice of hero worship in politics, which he considered dangerous for a democratic society. He argued that elevating individuals to the status of infallible leaders could result in the erosion of democratic institutions, suppression of dissent, and the establishment of authoritarian regimes. He famously remarked:

Bhakti in religion may be a road to the salvation of the soul. But in politics, Bhakti or hero-worship is a sure road to degradation and eventual dictatorship.

His disapproval of Gandhi’s hero worship was not personal but based on this principle. Ambedkar believed that democracy must be rooted in institutions, not personalities. For him, no leader, however great, should be placed above criticism or accountability.

Ambedkar’s Criticism of Gandhi’s Policies

Ambedkar’s critique of Gandhi extended beyond opposition to hero worship. He fundamentally disagreed with many of Gandhi’s socio-political views, especially on caste and social reform.

1. Caste System and Untouchability

Ambedkar, born into an ‘untouchable’ caste, dedicated his life to the eradication of caste-based discrimination. He viewed Gandhi’s approach to untouchability as superficial and paternalistic. Gandhi advocated for the upliftment of ‘Harijans’ (a term Ambedkar rejected), but he never supported the outright abolition of the caste system.

Ambedkar criticized Gandhi’s reliance on upper-caste Hindus to bring about social change, arguing that true reform could only come from within the oppressed communities themselves. He also rejected Gandhi’s endorsement of the varna system, which he saw as inherently oppressive.

“The outcast is a by-product of the caste system. There will be outcastes as long as there are castes. Nothing can emancipate the outcaste except the destruction of the caste system.”

2. Gandhi’s Tactics and Political Leadership

Ambedkar was also skeptical of Gandhi’s methods of political activism, particularly satyagraha (non-violent resistance). He felt that Gandhi’s tactics, though effective in mobilizing the masses, often ignored the specific needs of the oppressed classes.

In the Poona Pact of 1932, Gandhi’s opposition to Ambedkar’s demand for separate electorates for Dalits led to a significant political compromise. While Gandhi fasted unto death, urging national unity, Ambedkar felt cornered into accepting reserved seats within the Hindu electorate rather than separate political representation for Dalits. This event left a lasting impact on Ambedkar’s view of Gandhi’s leadership.

The Poona Pact and Its Aftermath

The Poona Pact was perhaps the most significant flashpoint between the two leaders. Ambedkar had secured British approval for separate electorates for Dalits through the Communal Award, recognizing them as a distinct political community. Gandhi opposed this, arguing that it would divide Hindu society permanently.

Ambedkar later expressed deep regret over agreeing to the compromise, feeling that it diluted the political power of Dalits. In his writings, he accused Gandhi of using emotional blackmail through his fast-unto-death to achieve political objectives, thus reinforcing his criticism of Gandhi’s hero-worship-driven influence.

“There was nothing noble in the fast. It was a foul and filthy act. It was the worst form of coercion against a helpless people.”

Ambedkar’s Fear of Gandhi’s Legacy

Ambedkar feared that Gandhi’s legacy of saintly reverence would set a dangerous precedent for Indian politics. He opposed the creation of a political culture where questioning Gandhi or any other national leader would be seen as sacrilegious.

He believed that democracy thrives only when leaders are subject to public scrutiny and accountability. For Ambedkar, the future of India depended on dismantling hero worship and building strong, democratic institutions guided by constitutional principles.

Historical and Contemporary Relevance

Ambedkar’s warnings about the dangers of hero worship, particularly regarding Gandhi, remain relevant in contemporary politics. The creation of political cults and personality-driven leadership continues to pose challenges to democracies worldwide.

India’s political culture has often veered toward the adulation of leaders, sometimes at the expense of democratic institutions. The elevation of leaders to near-divine status stifles dissent, weakens institutions, and fosters authoritarian tendencies—exactly what Ambedkar feared.

Reconciliation and Mutual Respect

Despite their differences, Ambedkar and Gandhi shared a commitment to India’s progress and the upliftment of marginalized communities. Gandhi’s assassination in 1948 shocked Ambedkar, who condemned the act unequivocally. While their ideologies never fully aligned, their combined legacies have shaped modern India.

In his later years, Ambedkar acknowledged Gandhi’s contributions to India’s freedom struggle but remained critical of his social and political methods. His views serve as a reminder that even revered leaders must be subject to honest critique in a functioning democracy.

Conclusion

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s critique of hero worship, particularly concerning Mahatma Gandhi, stemmed from his deep-rooted belief in rational thought, social justice, and constitutional governance. He recognized that no leader should be placed on an untouchable pedestal, immune from criticism and accountability.

While Gandhi is celebrated as the Father of the Nation, Ambedkar’s insistence on questioning his legacy underscores the complexities of India’s political history. Both leaders played indispensable roles in shaping India’s destiny, though through markedly different approaches. Ambedkar’s caution against hero worship remains a timeless lesson in democratic accountability, urging future generations to place institutions, principles, and justice above individual adulation.