While Gandhi and Ambedkar hold similar standpoints on the relation between religious orderings of the world and shapes of social existence, they sharply diverge, on certain occasions, regarding the question of what the crucial terms ‘caste’ and varņa refer to, so that they often seem to be talking past each other. Gandhi sought to cut through various traditional forms of Hindu socio-religious practices and develop a Hinduism which is grounded in the values of universal peace, love and benevolence. Ambedkar too rejected aspects of familiar historical varieties of Buddhism and configured a new vehicle whose goals were to be more specifically material than spiritual. However, while both Gandhi and Ambedkar thus sought to uncover the revitalizing impulses of religious ideals, they operated with different imaginations of the type of polity that would emerge from this social reconstruction. For Gandhi, the reinvigorated socio-religious whole would be structured by an ideal notion of varņa in which there would be no enmity among the interdependent units. For Ambedkar, in contrast, the vocabulary of varņa was irredeemably corrupted through its enmeshment in millennia-old structures of hierarchy, so that its employment would not generate sufficient momentum to break through entrenched systems of oppression.

中文翻译：

---

重新审视甘地-安贝德卡关于“ Caste”的辩论：瓦拉的多重共鸣

尽管甘地和安贝德卡在世界宗教秩序与社会存在形态之间的关系上持有相似的立场，但在某些情况下，他们对“ caste”和varņa的关键术语指的是问题有很大分歧。似乎彼此交谈。甘地寻求突破各种传统形式的印度教社会宗教习俗，并发展一种以普遍和平，爱与仁爱的价值观为基础的印度教。安贝德卡（Ambedkar）也拒绝熟悉佛教的历史变种，并设计了一种新的载具，其目标是更具体地而不是精神上的。然而，尽管甘地和安贝德卡都试图揭示宗教理想的复兴动力，他们对从这种社会重建中出现的政体类型有不同的想象力。对于甘地来说，复兴的社会宗教整体将由理想的瓦拉概念构成，在瓦拉中，相互依存的单位之间不会有敌意。相比之下，对于安贝德卡来说，瓦拉语的词汇由于被千禧年的等级制结构所束缚而无法挽回地被破坏，因此它的就业将不会产生足够的动力来冲破根深蒂固的压迫体系。