What do you think?
Rate this book
Worshipping False Gods: Ambedkar And The Facts Which Have Been Erased
Over the last couple of decades, B.R. Ambedkar has come to be idolized as no other political leader has. His statue is one of the largest in the Parliament complex. Political parties have reaped rich electoral dividends riding on his name. A decades-old cartoon of him in a textbook rocked Parliament for days recently, causing parties across the political spectrum to run for cover and call for the withdrawal of the 'offending' cartoon. In Worshipping False Gods, Arun Shourie employs his scholarly rigour to cast a critical look at the legend of Ambedkar. With his distinctive eye for detail, Shourie delves into archival records to ask pertinent questions: Did Ambedkar coordinate his opposition to the freedom struggle with the British? How does his approach to social change contrast with that of Mahatma Gandhi's? Did the Constitution spring from him or did it grow as a dynamic living organism? Passionately argued and based on a mountain of facts that it presents, Worshipping False Gods compels us to go behind the myths on which discourse is built in India today.
680 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1997
84 people are currently reading
1744 people want to read
About the author
Arun Shourie
39 books298 followersIndian economist, journalist, author and politician.
He has worked as an economist with the World Bank, a consultant to the Planning Commission of India, editor of the Indian Express and The Times of India and a Minister of Communications and Information Technology in the Vajpayee Ministry (1998–2004). He was awarded the Ramon Magsaysay Award in 1982 and the Padma Bhushan in 1990.
Popularly perceived as one of the main Hindu nationalist intellectuals during the 90s and early 2000s.
He has worked as an economist with the World Bank, a consultant to the Planning Commission of India, editor of the Indian Express and The Times of India and a Minister of Communications and Information Technology in the Vajpayee Ministry (1998–2004). He was awarded the Ramon Magsaysay Award in 1982 and the Padma Bhushan in 1990.
Popularly perceived as one of the main Hindu nationalist intellectuals during the 90s and early 2000s.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews
June 14, 2021
Click bait title to attract upper caste/class people who still harbour feeling of supremacy and want to abolish reservations (affirmative action) altogether! Wonder if Shourie has even read Ambedkar's own literature in entirety to understand why he opposed Congress and Gandhi who focused only on political reforms without social reforms. A good start for him would be "Annihilation of Caste"!
Mr Tilak had opposed British from banning Sati tradition, under the pretext that it would be "foreign interference" in "Hindu's internal matters"... sounds familiar? And as a WOMAN myself, I cannot but feel disgusted and disappointed by such thought process of so called political reformers! So Tilak had no hard feelings about letting thousands of women get burnt alive, because of his adamancy about political sovereignty to establish a "Hindu state"... where he wasn't sure whether he would ban such savage practices!
Dr Ambedkar opposed "such" political reforms that ignored the glastly state of social injustice! Can we really hold him guilty of that stand, given the abject discrimination and inhuman, unequal social treatment that he rose from?
Political reforms at the cost of continued social injustice on certain sections of society, is a luxury afforded by only upper caste and upper class people... more precisely men in those communities... even women aren't that lucky!
Mr Tilak had opposed British from banning Sati tradition, under the pretext that it would be "foreign interference" in "Hindu's internal matters"... sounds familiar? And as a WOMAN myself, I cannot but feel disgusted and disappointed by such thought process of so called political reformers! So Tilak had no hard feelings about letting thousands of women get burnt alive, because of his adamancy about political sovereignty to establish a "Hindu state"... where he wasn't sure whether he would ban such savage practices!
Dr Ambedkar opposed "such" political reforms that ignored the glastly state of social injustice! Can we really hold him guilty of that stand, given the abject discrimination and inhuman, unequal social treatment that he rose from?
Political reforms at the cost of continued social injustice on certain sections of society, is a luxury afforded by only upper caste and upper class people... more precisely men in those communities... even women aren't that lucky!
July 28, 2009
Best book for all those who consider Ambedkar as god or an architect of moder india ...
January 6, 2016
This book is what I personally categorise as contrary literature, There is an aura about Ambedkar in India and lot of that is result of caste politics. After all every single politician in India no matter which side of spectrum he/she falls on, would line up to pay homage to this guy, for normal population he would seem like a superman who single handedly wrote constitution of India and was epitome of what a person should be like.
Well not according to this book, if even 10% of the things written in this book are true and not taken out of context and presented in wrong light, one is bound to realise that basic theory of all politicians in the country is nothing but short sighted vote bank politics. The people who have responsibility of presenting history in right context for future generations are deliberately misrepresenting the facts and twisting them in order to further their personal gains. And their seems to be no gainsaying of the fact that biggest loser of this is the very minority in whose name all this dirty game is being played.
Book is written not based on thoughts of feelings but hard facts where sources are being mentioned and available in public domain. One thing I believe could have been added is one chapter about Ambedkar early life and one chapter about untouchable minority in India and the course of history so far. However book is very well written, a bit hard to read but nonetheless a good effort which is worth going through.
Well not according to this book, if even 10% of the things written in this book are true and not taken out of context and presented in wrong light, one is bound to realise that basic theory of all politicians in the country is nothing but short sighted vote bank politics. The people who have responsibility of presenting history in right context for future generations are deliberately misrepresenting the facts and twisting them in order to further their personal gains. And their seems to be no gainsaying of the fact that biggest loser of this is the very minority in whose name all this dirty game is being played.
Book is written not based on thoughts of feelings but hard facts where sources are being mentioned and available in public domain. One thing I believe could have been added is one chapter about Ambedkar early life and one chapter about untouchable minority in India and the course of history so far. However book is very well written, a bit hard to read but nonetheless a good effort which is worth going through.
September 1, 2013
Excellent book which describes the mentality of Ambedkarites and shows the reasons why British were so successful in holding India for so long. It also describes how our Constitution evolved and most surprising is how much of articles were borrowed from the Government of India Act, 1935. Simple amazing!!
December 9, 2012
The title itself suggests what the book is all about.
The book is divided in 3 main sections.
1) Role of Ambedkar as freedom fighter, how he opposed Congress (esp. Gandhi) and freedom movement.
2) Social reform - Ambedkar's way of social reform vs Gandhi's way of social reform. This section covers Pune pact.
3) Third part explains in detail how constitution of India evolved through various committees since 1925 and the roles for major players involved in this process.
At the end, Arun Shourie shares his experiences after publishing the first edition and answers FAQs regarding the book.
The book is divided in 3 main sections.
1) Role of Ambedkar as freedom fighter, how he opposed Congress (esp. Gandhi) and freedom movement.
2) Social reform - Ambedkar's way of social reform vs Gandhi's way of social reform. This section covers Pune pact.
3) Third part explains in detail how constitution of India evolved through various committees since 1925 and the roles for major players involved in this process.
At the end, Arun Shourie shares his experiences after publishing the first edition and answers FAQs regarding the book.
May 30, 2015
Quite intriguing book with many loose ends. This book will prop more question in your mind than it answers. Arun Shourie Again Brought Very Interesting Political View to light. Must read for ppl who are curious to know more about Ambedkar, Indian History, constitution.
January 25, 2018
Today there hangs a cloud of fear and intimidation over the country. Much as the leftist liberal intellectuals may hold those on the right wing responsible for this, they cannot escape from the fact that they have also contributed to this climate by being selectively outraged over the outbursts of intimidation. They have, over the years, demolished many an ancient idol(both figuratively and literally) in their new found zeal for propagating their world view. They have also been highly critical of Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru and Rajendra Prasad and exercise their full freedom of expression while trying to belittle their achievements. These modern priests of new gods of 20th century have, in the place of the idols of those gods who have been overthrown, installed new idols and are eloquent on the greatness of these neo Gods. They are silent on intolerance of the followers of these Bhakts of new Gods. One of those Gods, who have come to dominate the imagination of the left liberals is Dr. Ambedkar. In his well researched book, drawing heavily on the documents on Transfer of Power and Constituent Assembly debates, Shourie brings out the role of Dr. Ambedkar during freedom movement and repudiates the myth that Dr. Ambedkar is the sole author of Constitution of India. Mourning the trend of “repudiating its(india’s) own gods, its own traditions, its own history and starting worshiping the gods of conquerors” , Shourie has minced no words in attacking a culture of “ trading in the name of dispossessed by groups which have become a law unto themselves by enforcing a brand of history through verbal terrorism and actual assault” . Any person having a basic knowledge of constitutional history of India will be aware that Constitution of India was evolved through the collective thinking of many freedom fighters and hard work of so many people have gone into the shaping of the Constitution. Thus to confer the exclusive authorship of the Constitution on a single individual and make him a Manu of our ages is an attempt by vested interests to erase a part of the history. Shourie points out the fact that the Dr. Ambedkar was never a part of the freedom movement. He was an instrument in the hands of the British, as a part of Viceroy’s Council during Quit India movement and he played an active role in thwarting the efforts of nationalist leaders during the freedom movement. Shourie writes touchingly and emotionally about the events leading the Poona Pact. It was only through the courtesy of a broad minded Congress leadership, the predominant force in the Constituent Assembly, Mr. Ambedkar was elected to the constituent Assembly and subsequently was made head of the Drafting Committee of the Constitution. Shourie delves deeply into the Constituent Assembly Debates to show how the Indian Constitution was a “product of iterations, of revisions and adoption and re-opening and recasting “ – a document evolved over the years through the contribution of so many people, most of them unsung and not remembered today. And to his credit Dr. Ambedkar rose to the occasion and contributed his legal acumen in drafting the Constitution. But conferring authorship of the Constitution entirely on him is an attempt by vested interests who wanted to create an icon of depressed classes to further their political interests. Dr. Ambedkar himself had acknowledged the fact that Constitution was the culmination of joint efforts of many stalwarts. But the vested interests, who swear by him, have no respect for opposite view and have created a climate of fear and intimidation in which even liberal thinkers are afraid to speak. Incidentally, Shourie traces to this poison and bitterness of followers of Dr. Ambedkar to Dr. Ambedkar himself. Shourie has quoted Ortega Y Gasset, a Spanish philosopher to hold that these interests have created “ an ideology in which mediocrity is the norm, in which vulgarity is the right, in which the civility and reason are the veneer of the well –to-do, in which intimidation is argument, and assault is proof. “ This highly polemical and yet informative book is as relevant today as 20 years ago when it was published. This is all the more relevant as memories of sacrifices of many people who have laid down their life for freedom are erased from history and a cult following, highly intolerant of opposite views and supported by a political class hungry for power, of partisan leaders has emerged. Some repetitions of ideas and some factual errors(page 506 referring to amendment of Article 19 relating to freedom of expression – the Constitutional Amendment Act referred to was 16th and not 14th as mentioned) could have been avoided in otherwise a good scholarly book.
August 20, 2020
One of the best book for readers who want to close their eyes and just believe what is said and want to believe on false narrations, in some sense it has became a dictation because it doesn't let you think was it real it just pushes you towards the Direction in which author wants you to go, content has lots of snipping of facts which wouldn't have allowed the author to show his feelings towards one of the great social reformer India had, wasn't expecting this concious blunder from such an achieved scholar.
October 5, 2019
Quite an exhaustive detail book. It has way too much information but that's the thing about Arun Shourie, when he wants to prove his point he will show lots of facts, data and with so many backing.
February 17, 2024
** Two Stars ** or C-
In Becoming Babasaheb (2023), Aakash Singh Rathore writes that Shourie's book "to anyone who actually knows something about the life and times of Ambedkar, reeks so much of bullshit that it waters the eyes."
By writing this book Arun Shourie has done a great service to lay bare the pathology of a casteist Hindu mind. The book is bristling with outrage and impotent anger towards Babasaheb’s achievements and Dalit assertiveness against patronising and casteist Hindus like his idol Mahatma “Gandhiji” whom Shourie eulogises throughout the book while berating Ambedkar.
The contents of the book are laughably biased. For example, Shourie deems Gandhi’s “fast unto death” to oppose separate electorates for Dalits as a saintly sacrifice! It was a devious political blackmail that bullied weak Dalits and threatened their lives. The fast lasted barely 3 days and Ambedkar was forced to sign the Poona Pact. Gandhi and Co. would never try anything like that with Jinnah!
It’s a pity no detailed review of this book came out at the time. A respected Indian academic Sunil Khilnani published one in Foreign Policy magazine but he was far too kind to Shourie’s screed. Khilnani called this book a necessary corrective to the blind Ambedkar deification. Well, Ambedkar himself would oppose any deification (he would never want to become a “Mahatma”).
Shourie has been a bitter opponent of affirmative action, including the Mandal Commission for Other Backward Castes (OBC).
The book piles straw man’s arguments by cherry picking historical evidence to malign Ambedkar and deceitfully hiding information that could undermine his biases. For example, he ignores that every “freedom fighter” (Gandhi above all) lobbied and pleaded with the ruling British to protect their interests. Earlier in his “freedom struggle” Gandhi himself wanted India to be a British “Dominion”. He also wanted the Union Jack to be displayed on the Indian flag.
As far as we know Ambedkar, like Mahatma Gandhi, never called Black South Africans racist names, nor did he sleep with naked teenage girls to fortify his “celibacy” like Bapu Gandhi.
Shourie names Ambedkar (Dalit), Jinnah (Muslim ) and a Parsi leader who feared caste Hindu dominance in the “free India”. It was a common fear amongst all minority groups.
Ambedkar didn’t want the British to leave in haste before ensuring constitutional protections for India’s minority groups. History has proved Ambedkar right as Dalits remain the most impoverished and persecuted group in modern India. Shourie has nothing to say about the need for Dalit political leadership. Like M.K. Gandhi he expects millions of Dalits to be Hindu beasts of burden and pet animals without any voice of their own.
Also, Shourie calls Ambedkar an ungrateful wretch for resigning as the Congress Law minister in 1951 but he never cites the reasons for Ambedkar’s resignation. The biggest reason was that patriarchal, orthodox and backward-minded Hindu politicians refused to pass the Hindu code bill to ensure civil and property rights for Indian women.
I’m giving this petulant hit job of a book two stars because to serve his casteist agenda Shourie has compiled a lot of “evidence” with citations. Any discerning reader should revisit those sources and historical events for the full story of Ambedkar’s radical assertion for the rights of Dalits and Indian women of all backgrounds—Brahmin, Dalit or Muslim.
For a balanced and scholarly biography see,
A Part Apart: Life and Thought of B.R. Ambedkar by Ashok Gopal (Navayana, 2023)
https://www.amazon.com/Part-Apart-Lif...
Arundhati Roy’s The Doctor and the Saint
https://www.amazon.com/Doctor-Saint-A...
Dr. Ambedkar and Untouchability:
Fighting the Indian Caste System by Christophe Jaffrelot (Columbia University Press, 2005)
https://www.amazon.com/Dr-Ambedkar-Un...
In Becoming Babasaheb (2023), Aakash Singh Rathore writes that Shourie's book "to anyone who actually knows something about the life and times of Ambedkar, reeks so much of bullshit that it waters the eyes."
By writing this book Arun Shourie has done a great service to lay bare the pathology of a casteist Hindu mind. The book is bristling with outrage and impotent anger towards Babasaheb’s achievements and Dalit assertiveness against patronising and casteist Hindus like his idol Mahatma “Gandhiji” whom Shourie eulogises throughout the book while berating Ambedkar.
The contents of the book are laughably biased. For example, Shourie deems Gandhi’s “fast unto death” to oppose separate electorates for Dalits as a saintly sacrifice! It was a devious political blackmail that bullied weak Dalits and threatened their lives. The fast lasted barely 3 days and Ambedkar was forced to sign the Poona Pact. Gandhi and Co. would never try anything like that with Jinnah!
It’s a pity no detailed review of this book came out at the time. A respected Indian academic Sunil Khilnani published one in Foreign Policy magazine but he was far too kind to Shourie’s screed. Khilnani called this book a necessary corrective to the blind Ambedkar deification. Well, Ambedkar himself would oppose any deification (he would never want to become a “Mahatma”).
Shourie has been a bitter opponent of affirmative action, including the Mandal Commission for Other Backward Castes (OBC).
The book piles straw man’s arguments by cherry picking historical evidence to malign Ambedkar and deceitfully hiding information that could undermine his biases. For example, he ignores that every “freedom fighter” (Gandhi above all) lobbied and pleaded with the ruling British to protect their interests. Earlier in his “freedom struggle” Gandhi himself wanted India to be a British “Dominion”. He also wanted the Union Jack to be displayed on the Indian flag.
As far as we know Ambedkar, like Mahatma Gandhi, never called Black South Africans racist names, nor did he sleep with naked teenage girls to fortify his “celibacy” like Bapu Gandhi.
Shourie names Ambedkar (Dalit), Jinnah (Muslim ) and a Parsi leader who feared caste Hindu dominance in the “free India”. It was a common fear amongst all minority groups.
Ambedkar didn’t want the British to leave in haste before ensuring constitutional protections for India’s minority groups. History has proved Ambedkar right as Dalits remain the most impoverished and persecuted group in modern India. Shourie has nothing to say about the need for Dalit political leadership. Like M.K. Gandhi he expects millions of Dalits to be Hindu beasts of burden and pet animals without any voice of their own.
Also, Shourie calls Ambedkar an ungrateful wretch for resigning as the Congress Law minister in 1951 but he never cites the reasons for Ambedkar’s resignation. The biggest reason was that patriarchal, orthodox and backward-minded Hindu politicians refused to pass the Hindu code bill to ensure civil and property rights for Indian women.
I’m giving this petulant hit job of a book two stars because to serve his casteist agenda Shourie has compiled a lot of “evidence” with citations. Any discerning reader should revisit those sources and historical events for the full story of Ambedkar’s radical assertion for the rights of Dalits and Indian women of all backgrounds—Brahmin, Dalit or Muslim.
For a balanced and scholarly biography see,
A Part Apart: Life and Thought of B.R. Ambedkar by Ashok Gopal (Navayana, 2023)
https://www.amazon.com/Part-Apart-Lif...
Arundhati Roy’s The Doctor and the Saint
https://www.amazon.com/Doctor-Saint-A...
Dr. Ambedkar and Untouchability:
Fighting the Indian Caste System by Christophe Jaffrelot (Columbia University Press, 2005)
https://www.amazon.com/Dr-Ambedkar-Un...
January 20, 2023
Amazing book.
August 15, 2025
#79th Indian Independence Day
This is one of those books that sticks with you, especially when you first read it in college. Picking it up in 2000, can you imagine the shockwaves it sent through my understanding of modern Indian history?
Shourie doesn’t pull punches: he takes on the near-mythical aura surrounding B.R. Ambedkar and meticulously interrogates the received narratives about his role in India’s freedom struggle and the making of the Constitution.
Shourie’s argument is razor-sharp. He challenges two pervasive ideas: that Ambedkar was a principal leader of the independence movement, and that he was the sole or even primary architect of the Indian Constitution. Instead, Shourie emphasises that the Constitution emerged from years of collective deliberation within the Constituent Assembly.
He demonstrates, through painstaking archival research, that many of its provisions were influenced by earlier colonial frameworks, such as the Government of India Act, 1935.
The message is clear: Ambedkar was a key figure, but not a singularly omnipotent architect, and the Constitution itself was a complex product of iterations rather than the handiwork of one individual.
Shourie also takes aim at the political mythology that has grown around Ambedkar. He details instances where Ambedkar’s politics, especially his opposition to Gandhi and Congress, occasionally aligned with British interests, undermining the romanticised image of him as the unambiguous champion of Indian self-rule.
Beyond historical analysis, Shourie critiques contemporary idolisation—particularly in caste-based politics—highlighting, for instance, how Mayawati’s proliferation of statues and revision of textbooks has helped elevate Ambedkar into a near-divine figure. This exploration of posthumous myth-making is as provocative as his historical reassessment.
The book’s reception was predictably intense. Public burnings and emotional backlash underscore how charged the discussion around Ambedkar remains.
At the same time, readers and critics have lauded the work for its depth and archival rigour, though some find Shourie’s style polemical, dense, and, at times, tedious. Yet for those willing to navigate the verbosity, the rewards are significant: insights into the intricate debates of the Constituent Assembly, the nuanced evolution of constitutional provisions, and a clearer picture of the interplay between colonial legacy and independent Indian governance.
Even now, the book continues to resonate for those interested in revisiting India’s modern history with a critical eye. It’s not a casual read; it demands attention and patience.
But for anyone seeking to question dominant narratives and dig beneath the surface of revered figures, *Worshipping False Gods* remains an indispensable and enduring work.
Its archival depth, willingness to confront uncomfortable truths, and the sheer audacity of its critique make it a book that, once read, stays with you.
[Kolkata, August 15, 2025]
This is one of those books that sticks with you, especially when you first read it in college. Picking it up in 2000, can you imagine the shockwaves it sent through my understanding of modern Indian history?
Shourie doesn’t pull punches: he takes on the near-mythical aura surrounding B.R. Ambedkar and meticulously interrogates the received narratives about his role in India’s freedom struggle and the making of the Constitution.
Shourie’s argument is razor-sharp. He challenges two pervasive ideas: that Ambedkar was a principal leader of the independence movement, and that he was the sole or even primary architect of the Indian Constitution. Instead, Shourie emphasises that the Constitution emerged from years of collective deliberation within the Constituent Assembly.
He demonstrates, through painstaking archival research, that many of its provisions were influenced by earlier colonial frameworks, such as the Government of India Act, 1935.
The message is clear: Ambedkar was a key figure, but not a singularly omnipotent architect, and the Constitution itself was a complex product of iterations rather than the handiwork of one individual.
Shourie also takes aim at the political mythology that has grown around Ambedkar. He details instances where Ambedkar’s politics, especially his opposition to Gandhi and Congress, occasionally aligned with British interests, undermining the romanticised image of him as the unambiguous champion of Indian self-rule.
Beyond historical analysis, Shourie critiques contemporary idolisation—particularly in caste-based politics—highlighting, for instance, how Mayawati’s proliferation of statues and revision of textbooks has helped elevate Ambedkar into a near-divine figure. This exploration of posthumous myth-making is as provocative as his historical reassessment.
The book’s reception was predictably intense. Public burnings and emotional backlash underscore how charged the discussion around Ambedkar remains.
At the same time, readers and critics have lauded the work for its depth and archival rigour, though some find Shourie’s style polemical, dense, and, at times, tedious. Yet for those willing to navigate the verbosity, the rewards are significant: insights into the intricate debates of the Constituent Assembly, the nuanced evolution of constitutional provisions, and a clearer picture of the interplay between colonial legacy and independent Indian governance.
Even now, the book continues to resonate for those interested in revisiting India’s modern history with a critical eye. It’s not a casual read; it demands attention and patience.
But for anyone seeking to question dominant narratives and dig beneath the surface of revered figures, *Worshipping False Gods* remains an indispensable and enduring work.
Its archival depth, willingness to confront uncomfortable truths, and the sheer audacity of its critique make it a book that, once read, stays with you.
[Kolkata, August 15, 2025]
December 7, 2019
I spent 23 years of my life from the age of 10, growing up in India. It was drummed into us in school that there was only one architect, only one man who wrote the Constitution of India. My ignorance was shattered by this book. I found out that there was not one man who contributed to the Constitution of India but brilliant lawmakers from many states. One of those was Ch Ranbir Singh Hood, a prominent Haryana Lawmaker. Ranbir Singh Hooda had set a record for being a member of seven different houses in India's democratic history, a feat that has been registered and acknowledged by the Limca Book of Records.
This book is a must read if u want to understand modern India. It brilliantly shatters that myth that Bhim Rao Ambedkar was the sole author and architect of the Indian Constitution. The book is perceived to be an insult by people of certain political castes , caste systems who even till this day show their ignorance by insulting the author and his disabled son. Read it with an open mind. It's important to know fact from farce, truth from story tale. The myth was propagated by certain political parties as strategy to gain votes and is still perpetuated till this day. References are given throughout the book to check history archives where ever the author thought there were statements that might be challenged.
This book carries a special relevance in 2019 when the word 'Fakenews' is a reality.
Once again please read and keep discussion civilised and healthy, based on facts. I hope you will learn something from this book. I know I did.
This book is a must read if u want to understand modern India. It brilliantly shatters that myth that Bhim Rao Ambedkar was the sole author and architect of the Indian Constitution. The book is perceived to be an insult by people of certain political castes , caste systems who even till this day show their ignorance by insulting the author and his disabled son. Read it with an open mind. It's important to know fact from farce, truth from story tale. The myth was propagated by certain political parties as strategy to gain votes and is still perpetuated till this day. References are given throughout the book to check history archives where ever the author thought there were statements that might be challenged.
This book carries a special relevance in 2019 when the word 'Fakenews' is a reality.
Once again please read and keep discussion civilised and healthy, based on facts. I hope you will learn something from this book. I know I did.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
October 9, 2022
Truth can be uncomfortable, truth can be bitter but truth is required to be told, so that people with agency can see the real picture and make their own conclusion.
Arun Shourie has done a remarkable job in bringing forward the truth regarding the so called father of Indian constitution, unbiasedly and solely based on documented speeches, letters and transcripts of official proceedings of both British India's assembly and cabinet meetings.
Highly recommended for people who are open-minded and not restricted to any echo-chambers when it comes to pursuing the truth regarding India's freedom struggle.
Arun Shourie has done a remarkable job in bringing forward the truth regarding the so called father of Indian constitution, unbiasedly and solely based on documented speeches, letters and transcripts of official proceedings of both British India's assembly and cabinet meetings.
Highly recommended for people who are open-minded and not restricted to any echo-chambers when it comes to pursuing the truth regarding India's freedom struggle.
September 17, 2020
I think I haven't read a more poorly edited book than this. Same quotes/incidences have been repeated several times in the book. Every thing that author tells in the book could have been told in atmost 50 pages.
July 8, 2025
Nobody is perfect, not even past or current people we deify. I do not wish to say that Dr B.R. Ambedkar was an ideal human being, but, despite Arun Shourie’s book, I continue to believe he was a great man, albeit with flaws.
I can describe this book as a diatribe, which uncovers many unflattering aspects of Dr. Ambedkar’s behavior during and after the Partition struggle. For instance, I was unaware that Dr. Ambedkar was a British apologist, that he was a member of the British government in India, or that he did not take part in the freedom struggle.
I knew he was not a fan of Mahatma Gandhi, but I did not think he was almost an enemy of the Mahatma. From the book, I gained the distinct impression that Dr. Ambedkar disliked Mahatma Gandhi and attempted to thwart him at every step.
Dr. Ambedkar wished the public to see him as the champion of the Dalits, and Mahatma Gandhi’s actions (including his fasts) and speeches robbed Dr. Ambedkar of some of the glory he aspired towards.
As per Arun Shourie’s book, hatred towards Hindus and Hinduism, Dr. Ambedkar’s conversion to Buddhism was without a genuine desire to embrace Buddhist beliefs. If you have read Dr. Ambedkar’s writings, as I have, you may concur with Arun Shourie’s conclusion.
Who was the ‘father’ of India’s Constitution? In school, we learned that Dr. Ambedkar was the architect of the Constitution, but Arun Shourie casts doubt on this aspect of Indian history.
I can delve deeper into various aspects of the book, but I will resist the temptation to do so. While Arun Shourie has gone through considerable effort to insert detailed quotations in the book, a discerning reader must ask a pertinent question: Did Arun Shourie choose quotations to buttress his case, or was he impartial? Unfortunately, journalists who enter politics are rarely impartial, and it is essential to keep this fact in mind while reading the book.
The second weakness is that he does not give us any background information about Dr. Ambedkar’s life. An excellent and impartial historian would have started with Dr. Ambedkar’s life story and analyzed the key events that could have influenced his attitudes. By starting the narrative in 1920 CE, or thereabouts, the author launched straight into the events of an extraordinarily complex and confusing chapter in our history, without giving any background information to enable the reader to make an independent analysis of Dr. Ambedkar’s legacy or personality.
There are no Gods.
I can describe this book as a diatribe, which uncovers many unflattering aspects of Dr. Ambedkar’s behavior during and after the Partition struggle. For instance, I was unaware that Dr. Ambedkar was a British apologist, that he was a member of the British government in India, or that he did not take part in the freedom struggle.
I knew he was not a fan of Mahatma Gandhi, but I did not think he was almost an enemy of the Mahatma. From the book, I gained the distinct impression that Dr. Ambedkar disliked Mahatma Gandhi and attempted to thwart him at every step.
Dr. Ambedkar wished the public to see him as the champion of the Dalits, and Mahatma Gandhi’s actions (including his fasts) and speeches robbed Dr. Ambedkar of some of the glory he aspired towards.
As per Arun Shourie’s book, hatred towards Hindus and Hinduism, Dr. Ambedkar’s conversion to Buddhism was without a genuine desire to embrace Buddhist beliefs. If you have read Dr. Ambedkar’s writings, as I have, you may concur with Arun Shourie’s conclusion.
Who was the ‘father’ of India’s Constitution? In school, we learned that Dr. Ambedkar was the architect of the Constitution, but Arun Shourie casts doubt on this aspect of Indian history.
I can delve deeper into various aspects of the book, but I will resist the temptation to do so. While Arun Shourie has gone through considerable effort to insert detailed quotations in the book, a discerning reader must ask a pertinent question: Did Arun Shourie choose quotations to buttress his case, or was he impartial? Unfortunately, journalists who enter politics are rarely impartial, and it is essential to keep this fact in mind while reading the book.
The second weakness is that he does not give us any background information about Dr. Ambedkar’s life. An excellent and impartial historian would have started with Dr. Ambedkar’s life story and analyzed the key events that could have influenced his attitudes. By starting the narrative in 1920 CE, or thereabouts, the author launched straight into the events of an extraordinarily complex and confusing chapter in our history, without giving any background information to enable the reader to make an independent analysis of Dr. Ambedkar’s legacy or personality.
There are no Gods.
November 1, 2023
It would be a real challenge to find 10 things in our school book history, that's true.
May 23, 2020
Absolutely brilliant... Lot of guts to take on this subject
November 4, 2021
Arun Shourie is not my favourite politician or author but he a rare public figure- one that courageous. The facts about Ambedkar have been free for all to access and judge him. But foul attacks and immediate slander of his critics have made a book like this almost impossible.
A must-read sketch of ambedkar’s activities that most of his admirers haven’t been told.
A must-read sketch of ambedkar’s activities that most of his admirers haven’t been told.
March 27, 2024
Read it alongside Tharoor's Ambedkar; it is an absolute mind bending experience because of the facts that it brings to light that demolish every preconceived notion that has been systematically ingrained in us.
March 28, 2023
A well researched and well argued book on Dr B R Ambedkar
April 16, 2025
Read the whole thing wearing a Bhim cap to protect myself from intellectual contamination.
April 30, 2025
Good book that calls a spade, a spade. However, author is cleverly portraying Gandhi and Nehru as impeccable to drive his point which is Ambedkar is a selfish mortal. Ambedkar has his own merits but author seems to be discounting that.
But, this book is a must read as current Indian politics (as of April 30, 2025) is all about winning Dalit Vote banks & wont allow criticism against Ambedkar or any dalit figure in general.
But, this book is a must read as current Indian politics (as of April 30, 2025) is all about winning Dalit Vote banks & wont allow criticism against Ambedkar or any dalit figure in general.
September 6, 2020
There is process called editing which is missing in this book. There are some good arguments with substantiation by the author but hte book is too damn boring.
November 27, 2023
super book by Shourie. an eye opener.. all those who say that Constitution is written by Ambedkar are in a big big shock. it was also shocking to know that he was in British Govt and he wanted them to stay. he said that i will burn this constitution. A brilliant but stubborn man who wanted to have his ways.. chit bhi meri pat bi meri.
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews