Religion of Buddha Vs Buddhism

Overview:

The Religion of Buddha is a religion of principles. A religion based on doctrines, not institutions. However, Buddhism is a sort of organised religion. 

Buddhism believes in organising a religion,

whereas the Religion of Buddha organises people. It's a religion of liberty, equality, and fraternity and rationale.

Introduction:

Political thought cannot be implanted in people by making them aware of various political theories. Neither can they be taught political science. To organize people, social and political thought should come from their religion. That's why Ambedkar insists why there a need for religion. And by religion, he means religion of principles that will also prove to be the basis of political thoughts of the masses. For this purpose, he converted to Buddhism.

However, nowhere in his work, Ambedkar means Buddhism by traditional Buddhism. His meaning of Buddhism lies in the religion of Buddha, which is in stark contrast with conventional Buddhism. He renounced other prevalent forms of Buddhism and restructured his Buddhism (later called Navayana) aligned with the thoughts and principles of the Buddha. 

One of seminal work of Ambedkar, the title was Buddha and his Dhamma where the title itself suggests a deviation from Buddhism and going back reclaiming of Religion of Budhha. The second term "Dhamma" he uses not in place of Dharma, but its notation is entirely different from Dharma itself. Dharma, in its essence, is Duty-bound, whereas Dhamma in its core is Principle-bound.

Ambedkar's accepting the religion of Buddha has multiple layers of purpose in it. 

The defeat of Brahminism is requisite for the creation of a just society.

But indeed he desired for something else, the need for political thought among the masses as a tool to organize themselves. This principle for organizing should, according to him, come from religion.