THE BUDDHA AND HIS DHAMMA by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar

THE BUDDHA
AND HIS DHAMMA
by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar





The Great Stupa at Sarnath, near Varanasi, is said to mark the site where the Buddha preached
his first sermon.

---

[*EDITOR'S INTRODUCTION*]
*AUTHOR'S UNPUBLISHED PREFACE*
*INTRODUCTION*
*PROLOGUE*
BOOK ONE: SIDDHARTH GAUTAMA — HOW A
BODHISATTA BECAME THE BUDDHA
*Part I — From Birth to Parivraja*
*Part II — Renunciation for Ever*
*Part III — In Search of New Light*
*Part IV — Enlightenment and the Vision of a New Way*
*Part V — The Buddha and His Predecessors*
*Part VI — The Buddha and His Contemporaries*
*Part VII — Comparison and Contrast*
BOOK TWO: CAMPAIGN OF CONVERSION
*Part I — Buddha and His Vishad Yoga*
*Part II — The Conversion of the Parivrajakas*
*Part III — Conversion of the High and the Holy*
*Part IV — Call from Home*
*Part V — Campaign for Conversion Resumed*
*Part VI — Conversion of the Low and the Lowly*
*Part VII — Conversion of Women*
*Part VIII — Conversion of the Fallen and the Criminals*
BOOK THREE: WHAT THE BUDDHA TAUGHT
*Part I — His Place in His Dhamma*
*Part II — Different Views of the Buddha's Dhamma*
*Part III — What is Dhamma*
*Part IV — What is Not Dhamma*
*Part V — What is Saddhamma*
BOOK FOUR: RELIGION AND DHAMMA
*Part I — Religion and Dhamma*
*Part II — How Similarities in Terminology Conceal Fundamental Difference*
*Part III — The Buddhist Way of Life*
*Part IV — His Sermons*

---

BOOK FIVE: THE SANGH
*Part I — The Sangh*
*Part II — The Bhikkhu: the Buddha's Conception of Him*
*Part III — The Duties of the Bhikkhu*
*Part IV — The Bhikkhu and the Laity*
*Part V — Vinaya for the Laity*
BOOK SIX: HE AND HIS CONTEMPORARIES
*Part I — His Benefactors*
*Part II — His Enemies*
*Part III — Critics of His Doctrines*
*Part IV — Friends and Admirers*
BOOK SEVEN: THE WANDERER'S LAST JOURNEY
*Book Seven, Part I — The Meeting of those Near and Dear*
*Book Seven, Part II — Leaving Vaishali*
*Book Seven, Part III — His End*
BOOK EIGHT: THE MAN WHO WAS SIDDHARTHA
GAUTAMA
*Book Eight, Part I — His Personality*
*Book Eight, Part II — His Humanity*
*Book Eight, Part III — His Likes and Dislikes*
*EPILOGUE*

---

UNPUBLISHED
PREFACE
April 6, 1956
[Text provided by Eleanor Zelliot, as prepared by Vasant Moon]

A question is always asked to me: how I happen[ed] to take such [a] high degree of education.
Another question is being asked: why I am inclined towards Buddhism. These questions are
asked because I was born in a community known in India as the "Untouchables." This preface is

---

not the place for answering the first question. But this preface may be the place for answering the
second question.
The direct answer to this question is that I regard the Buddha's Dhamma to be the best. No
religion can be compared to it. If a modern man who knws science must have a religion, the only
religion he can have is the Religion of the Buddha. This conviction has grown in me after thirty-
five years of close study of all religions.
How I was led to study Buddhism is another story. It may be interesting for the reader to know.
This is how it happened.
My father was a military officer, but at the same time a very religious person. He brought me up
under a strict discipline. From my early age I found certain contradictions in my father's religious
way of life. He was a Kabirpanthi, though his father was Ramanandi. As such, he did not believe
in Murti Puja (Idol Worship), and yet he performed Ganapati Puja--of course for our sake, but I
did not like it. He read the books of his Panth. At the same time, he compelled me and my elder
brother to read every day before going to bed a portion of [the] Mahabharata and Ramayana to
my sisters and other persons who assembled at my father's house to hear the Katha. This went on
for a long number of years.
The year I passed the English Fourth Standard Examination, my community people wanted to
celebrate the occasion by holding a public meeting to congratulate me. Compared to the state of
education in other communities, this was hardly an occasion for celebration. But it was felt by
the organisers that I was the first boy in my community to reach this stage; they thought that I
had reached a great height. They went to my father to ask for his permission. My father flatly
refused, saying that such a thing would inflate the boy's head; after all, he has only passed an
examination and done nothing more. Those who wanted to celebrate the event were greatly
disappointed. They, however, did not give way. They went to Dada Keluskar, a personal friend
of my father, and asked him to intervene. He agreed. After a little argumentation, my father
yielded, and the meeting was held. Dada Keluskar presided. He was a literary person of his time.
At the end of his address he gave me as a gift a copy of his book on the life of the Buddha, which
he had written for the Baroda Sayajirao Oriental Series. I read the book with great interest, and
was greatly impressed and moved by it.
I began to ask why my father did not introduce us to the Buddhist literature. After this, I was
determined to ask my father this question. One day I did. I asked my father why he insisted upon
our reading the Mahabharata and Ramayana, which recounted the greatness of the Brahmins
and the Kshatriyas and repeated the stories of the degradation of the Shudras and the
Untouchables. My father did not like the question. He merely said, "You must not ask such silly
questions. You are only boys; you must do as you are told." My father was a Roman Patriarch,
and exercised most extensive Patria Pretestas over his children. I alone could take a little liberty
with him, and that was because my mother had died in my childhood, leaving me to the care of
my auntie.
So after some time, I asked again the same question. This time my father had evidently prepared
himself for a reply. He said, "The reason why I ask you to read the Mahabharata and

---

Ramayana is this: we belong to the Untouchables, and you are likely to develop an inferiority
complex, which is natural. The value of [the] Mahabharata and Ramayana lies in removing
this inferiority complex. See Drona and Karna--they were small men, but to what heights they
rose! Look at Valmiki--he was a Koli, but he became the author of [the] Ramayana. It is for
removing this inferiority complex that I ask you to read the Mahabharata and Ramayana."
I could see that there was some force in my father's argument. But I was not satisfied. I told my
father that I did not like any of the figures in [the] Mahabharata. I said, "I do not like Bhishma
and Drona, nor Krishna. Bhishma and Drona were hypocrites. They said one thing and did quite
the opposite. Krishna believed in fraud. His life is nothing but a series of frauds. Equal dislike I
have for Rama. Examine his conduct in the Sarupnakha [=Shurpanakha] episode [and] in the
Vali Sugriva episode, and his beastly behaviour towards Sita." My father was silent, and made
no reply. He knew that there was a revolt.
This is how I turned to the Buddha, with the help of the book given to me by Dada Keluskar. It
was not with an empty mind that I went to the Buddha at that early age. I had a background, and
in reading the Buddhist Lore I could always compare and contrast. This is the origin of my
interest in the Buddha and His Dhamma.
The urge to write this book has a different origin. In 1951 the Editor of the Mahabodhi Society's
Journal of Calcutta asked me to write an article for the Vaishak Number. In that article I argued
that the Buddha's Religion was the only religion which a society awakened by science could
accept, and without which it would perish. I also pointed out that for the modern world
Buddhism was the only religion which it must have to save itself. That Buddhism makes [a] slow
advance is due to the fact that its literature is so vast that no one can read the whole of it. That it
has no such thing as a bible, as the Christians have, is its greatest handicap. On the publication of
this article, I received many calls, written and oral, to write such a book. It is in response to these
calls that I have undertaken the task.
To disarm all criticism I would like to make it clear that I claim no originality for the book. It is a
compilation and assembly plant. The material has been gathered from various books. I would
particularly like to mention Ashvaghosha's Buddhavita [=Buddhacharita], whose poetry no
one can excel. In the narrative of certain events I have even borrowed his language.
The only originality that I can claim in [=is] the order of presentation of the topics, in which I
have tried to introduce simplicity and clarity. There are certain matters which give headache[s] to
the student of Buddhism. I have dealt with them in the Introduction.
It remains for me to express my gratitude to those who have been helpful to me. I am very
grateful to Mr. Nanak Chand Rattua of Village Sakrulli and Mr. Parkash Chand of Village
Nangal Khurd in the district of Hoshiarpur (Punjab) for the burden they have taken upon
themselves to type out the manuscript. They have done it several times. Shri Nanak Chand Rattu
took special pains and put in very hard labour in accomplishing this great task. He did the whole
work of typing etc. very willingly and without caring for his health and [=or] any sort of
remuneration. Both Mr. Nanak Chand Rattu and Mr. Parkash Chand did their job as a token of

---

their greatest love and affection towards me. Their labours can hardly be repaid. I am very much
grateful to them.
When I took up the task of composing the book I was ill, and [I] am still ill. During these five
years there were many ups and downs in my health. At some stages my condition had become so
critical that doctors talked of me as a dying flame. The successful rekindling of this dying flame
is due to the medical skill of my wife and Dr. Malvankar. They alone have helped me to
complete the work. I am also thankful to Mr. M. B. Chitnis, who took [a] special interest in
correcting [the] proof and to go [=in going] through the whole book.
I may mention that this is one of the three books which will form a set for the proper
understanding of Buddhism. The other books are: (i) Buddha and Karl Marx; and (ii)
Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Ancient India. They are written out in parts. I hope to
publish them soon.
B. R. Ambedkar
26 Alipur Road, Delhi
6-4-56

---

INTRODUCTION
Indications of a growth in the volume of interest in Buddhism are noticeable in some sections of
the Indian people. Along with it there is naturally a growing demand for a clear and consistent
statement of the life and teachings of the Buddha.
Anyone who is not a Buddhist finds it extremely difficult to present the life and teachings of the
Buddha in a manner which would make it a consistent whole. Depending on the Nikayas, not
only the presentation of a consistent story of the life of the Buddha becomes a difficult thing and
the presentation of some parts of his teachings becomes much more so. Indeed it would not be an
exaggeration to say that of all the founders of religions in the world, the presentation of the life
and teachings of the founder of Buddhism presents a problem which is quite puzzling if not
baffling. Is it not necessary that these problems should be solved, and the path for the
understanding of Buddhism be made clear? Is it not time that those who are Buddhists should
take up these problems, at least for general discussion, and throw what light they can on these
problems?
With a view to raise a discussion on these problems, I propose to set them out here. The first
problem relates to the main event in the life of the Buddha, namely, Parivraja. Why did the

---

Buddha take Parivraja? The traditional answer is that he took Parivraja because he saw a dead
person, a sick person and an old person. This answer is absurd on the face of it. The Buddha took
Parivraja at the age of 29. If he took Parivraja as a result of these three sights, how is it he did not
see these three sights earlier? These are common events occurring by hundreds, and the Buddha
could not have failed to come across them earlier. It is impossible to accept the traditional
explanation that this was the first time he saw them. The explanation is not plausible and does
not appeal to reason. But if this is not the answer to the question, what is the real answer?
The second problem is created by the four Aryan Truths. Do they form part of the original
teachings of the Buddha? This formula cuts at the root of Buddhism. If life is sorrow, death is
sorrow, and rebirth is sorrow, then there is an end of everything. Neither religion nor philosophy
can help a man to achieve happiness in the world. If there is no escape from sorrow, then what
can religion do, what can Buddha do, to relieve man from such sorrow which is ever there in
birth itself? The four Aryan Truths are a great stumbling block in the way of non-Buddhists
accepting the gospel of Buddhism. For the four Aryan Truths deny hope to man. The four Aryan
Truths make the gospel of the Buddha a gospel of pessimism. Do they form part of the original
gospel, or are they a later accretion by the monks?
The third problem relates to the doctrines of soul, of karma and rebirth. The Buddha denied the
existence of the soul. But he is also said to have affirmed the doctrine of karma and rebirth. At
once a question arises. If there is no soul, how can there be karma? If there is no soul, how can
there be rebirth? These are baffling questions. In what sense did the Buddha use the words karma
and rebirth? Did he use them in a different sense than the sense in which they were used by the
Brahmins of his day? If so, in what sense? Did he use them in the same sense in which the
Brahmins used them? If so, is there not a terrible contradiction between the denial of the soul and
the affirmation of karma and rebirth? This contradiction needs to be resolved.
The fourth problem relates to the Bhikkhu. What was the object of the Buddha in creating the
Bhikkhu? Was the object to create a perfect man? Or was his object to create a social servant
devoting his life to service of the people and being their friend, guide and philosopher? This is a
very real question. On it depends the future of Buddhism. If the Bhikkhu is only a perfect man he
is of no use to the propagation of Buddhism, because though a perfect man he is a selfish man. If,
on the other hand, he is a social servant, he may prove to be the hope of Buddhism. This question
must be decided not so much in the interest of doctrinal consistency but in the interest of the
future of Buddhism.
If I may say so, the pages of the journal of the Mahabodhi Society make, to me at any rate, dull
reading. This is not because the material presented is not interesting and instructive. The dullness
is due to the fact that it seems to fall upon a passive set of readers. After reading an article, one
likes to know what the reader of the journal has to say about it. But the reader never gives out his
reaction. This silence on the part of the reader is a great discouragement to the writer. I hope my
questions will excite the readers to come and make their contribution to their solution.

---

PROLOGUE
"From time to time men find themselves forced to reconsider current and inherited beliefs and
ideas, to gain some harmony between present and past experience, and to reach a position which
shall satisfy the demands of feeling and reflexion and give confidence for facing the future. If, at
the present day, religion, as a subject of critical or scientific inquiry, of both practical and
theoretical significance has attracted increasing attention, this can be ascribed to (a) the rapid
progress of scientific knowledge and thought; (b) the deeper intellectual interest in the subject;
(c) the widespread tendencies in all parts of the world to reform or reconstruct religion, or even
to replace it by some body of thought, more 'rational' and 'scientific' or less 'superstitious'; and
(d) the effect of social, political, and international events of a sort which, in the past, have both
influenced and been influenced by religion. Whenever the ethical or moral value of activities or
conditions is questioned, the value of religion is involved; and all deep-stirring experiences
invariably compel a reconsideration of the most fundamental ideas, whether they are explicitly
religious or not. Ultimately there arise problems of justice, human destiny, God, and the
universe; and these in turn involve problems of the relation between 'religious' and other ideas,
the validity of ordinary knowledge, and practicable conceptions of 'experience' and 'reality'."

---