Did Ambedkar hate Hindus?
He drew a line, again and again, between individual Hindus and the system he said held them. His quarrel was with a doctrine of graded inequality he believed was sanctioned by scripture, not with the people born into it, many of whom he counted as colleagues, teachers and friends. A Brahmin teacher gave him the surname he carried; Brahmins and other caste Hindus stood with him at Mahad and after; his own reform bills were carried through a Hindu-majority house.
What is true is that he ended his life outside Hinduism, and said in 1935 he would not die a Hindu. But he framed even that as a judgement on a structure rather than a hatred of persons: he had spent two decades trying to reform the religion from within — at Mahad, over temple entry, over the Manusmriti — and concluded that the graded order was not a corruption of it that could be removed but load-bearing. Leaving was the verdict on the system, reached slowly and in public.
To read that as personal hatred is to miss what he actually did with his life, which was to write equal citizenship into law for everyone, including the people whose religion he left. He protected in the Constitution the very communities he argued with.
In the Journey: The speech that was never delivered, 1935–1936