ABSTRACT A few critics of Periyar E.V. Ramasamy have accused him of paying inadequate attention to the Dalit question or ignoring it altogether. Others have said that he was merely anti-Brahmin and not anti-caste, alleging that he favoured the intermediate castes over the Dalits. Contrary to allegations that Periyar tried to silence, or was indifferent to the particular interests of Dalit castes, Periyar’s works reveal that he placed Dalit liberation as an important element of the Dravidian project. Acknowledging his indebtedness to Ambedkar, Periyar was uncompromising in attacking the graded system of caste hierarchy and difference and discouraged accommodation within the system through ‘sanskritization’. In cases of conflict between intermediate castes and the Dalits, he stood on the side of the latter. Addressing caste divisions within the non-Brahmin bloc, he advocated both secular and religious forms of Dalit militancy. This article provides a systematic account of Periyar’s approach to the Dalit question, substantially focusing on his engagement with Ambedkar. It uses Periyar’s primary works to demonstrate the centrality of Dalit empowerment and liberation in Periyar’s political thought. It concludes with a discussion of his responses to anti-Dalit incidents in his lifetime, where he clearly sides with the Dalits against powerful intermediate castes.

中文翻译：

---

在Ambedkar的道路上：佩里亚尔和达利特问题

摘要一些对Periyar EV Ramasamy的批评者指责他对达利特问题没有给予足够的重视或完全无视它。其他人则说他只是反婆罗门而不是反种姓，声称他比达利特人更偏爱中间阶级。与佩里亚尔试图保持沉默或对达利特种姓的特殊利益漠不关心的指控相反，佩里亚尔的作品表明，他将达利特解放视为德拉维安计划的重要组成部分。佩里亚尔承认自己对安贝德卡（Ambedkar）负有债务，因此他毫不妥协地攻击种姓等级制度和等级差异的等级制，并通过“梵文化”阻止了等级制内的适应。在中间种姓与达利特人之间发生冲突的情况下，他站在后者的一边。在谈到非婆罗门集团内部的种姓分歧时，他主张达利特武装的世俗形式和宗教形式。本文系统地介绍了Periyar处理达利特问题的方法，主要侧重于他与Ambedkar的接触。它使用佩里亚尔的主要著作来证明达利特赋权和解放在佩里亚尔政治思想中的中心地位。最后总结了他一生对反达利特人事件的反应，在那次活动中，他显然与达利特人一起对抗强大的中间种姓。它使用佩里亚尔的主要著作来证明达利特赋权和解放在佩里亚尔政治思想中的中心地位。最后总结了他一生对反达利特人事件的反应，在那次活动中，他显然与达利特人一起对抗强大的中间种姓。它使用佩里亚尔的主要著作来证明达利特赋权和解放在佩里亚尔政治思想中的中心地位。最后总结了他一生对反达利特人事件的反应，在那次活动中，他显然与达利特人一起对抗强大的中间种姓。