Vol. 14, Part I · pages 406–410

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES388 Shri L. Krishnaswami Bharati : He either speaks now or he does not. According to the rules, if a Member is asked to speak, he must speak; otherwise he looses the chance to speak on the subject. Mr. Chairman : Babu Ramnarayan Singh. Babu Ramnarayan Singh : I thank you, Mr. Chairman for the opportunity you have so kindly given me today to do my part to oppose the obnoxious measure which has come on the floor of the House for discussion. Sir, at the outset I must tell the house that I am not an orthodox man. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : You are not orthodox. I know you are not *Babu Ramnarayan Singh : I am one of those who wants that all that is old must be broken without delay. But everything must be done with wisdom. When a thing is to be done, wisdom demands that we should judge when it is to be done and how it is to be done. I tell my honourable Friend Dr. Ambedkar that I am one of his admirers. I feel that he is the pride of the country : he is my pride also. But I do not understand why such a learned man is engaged in such a useless and pernicious job. Sir, this is a government measure. I do not know what they understand by law. Law is nothing but the will of the people expressed in terms of law. I am sorry that the Government does not understand what is law. I say that a majority of the people of this country feel that this measure should not have come on the floor of this House....................... An Honourable Member : No. Babu Ramnarayan Singh : Take a plebiscite and you will find it. Shri L. Krishnaswami Bharati : We are here representing them. Babu Ramnarayan Singh : Apparently it appears that there is a measure called the Hindu Code Bill and a discussion is going on in this House but in fact a conspiracy is being hatched to disrupt the Hindu society. I feel that it is something like a preparation to invade the Hindu society. Nobody can say how long this Hindu Society has lived and flourished in this would. I can say that since the very creation of the world, since the creation of the sun and the moon, since the very creation of the human race the Hindu society has lived and flourished and during all these periods there have been innumerable invasions of all descriptions against this Hindu society, Buddha came * C.A. (Leg) D., Vol. II, Part II, 28th February 1949, pp. 950-53.

DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 389 first. At one time it looked that Hindu Society would be no more but the world Guru Sankaracharya came and exported Buddhism from this country and re-established the Hindu society. Then Islam came. That was also an invasion like Buddhism but it was also a military one but I must say that Islam also failed in this country . . . . Dr. Mono Mohan Das (West Bengal): Islam has become the Saviour and you have taken the protection of Islam. Babu Ramnarayan Singh : Islam could not become the saviour but Islam too failed in this country. According to Islam there is no caste system in the Koran but some sort of caste system developed among those who followed Islam. In the same way Jainism, Sikhism all came in and originally they were all invasions against Hinduism but in course of time they became tolerant and tried to develop and flourish side by side with the Hindu society and religion. This time this is also a sort of invasion but this invasion is a democratic one, though the force behind it, is a dictatorial one. Some of my friends have already said that there has been a discussion in this House as regards the authority of this house to enact this measure. It is true and I feel confident that this House is not competent to enact a measure of this kind. This is not a Constituent Assembly even .... An Honourable Member: What is it ? Babu Ramanarayan Singh: It is a part of the constituent assembly. A large number of members of this House either by order or by convention have been asked not to attend this Assembly .... Shri L. Krishnaswami Bharathi: With that the House is not directly concerned. The Speaker has already said that that is not a matter for the House. Babu Ramnarayan Singh : Whatever may be the ruling of the Speaker I am not talking against that. I bow to the ruling of the Speaker but I am bound to speak for the world about the competency or authority of this House to anact this measure. The mandate of the country to the Assembly is to frame the constitution of the country. But so long as that constitution is not complete or has not come into force the Government must go on. It was by a hotchpotch agreement with the foreign rulers that this arrangement had been arrived at in order to pass the budget and any other important legislation necessary for the administration of the country. But such a measure like this against

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES390 which there is a lot of hue and cry throughout this country should not have come before this House for discussion or enactment. When I hear in this house as well as outside the cry about the equality of woman with man I fail to understand it . . . . Mr. Tajamul Husain: May I ask the honourable Member why he accepted membership on the Committee when he is opposed to the constitution of this very honourable house. Babu Ramnarayan Singh : There are many people who are confounded. The measure was sent to the Select Committee. This means that the House accepted the principle of the measure but this does not mean that every member has accepted the measure or accepted the principle of the measure. There are so many principles involved in this measure that so far as the house is concerned nobody can say that it has accepted anything and everything . . . Shri L. Krishnaswami Bharathi: If it was sent to the Select Committee, it means that it accepts the principle. Babu Ramnarayan Singh: I was talking about the equality of man and woman. According to our Shastras man is not complete; nor is woman complete. According to our Shastras woman is called Ardhangi and even so man is not complete . . . An Honourable Member: What is man called ? Babu Ramnarayan Singh : Man is also half. I may tell you .... Pandit Lakshmi Kanta Maitra (West Bengal: General): Sir, it is impossible to speak in the house when an honourable member addresses it on an important measure like this there are innumerable criticism, and running commentaries, and laughter going on simultaneolusly. It is not in the interest of the dignity of the House. Members who do not like the speech may at least keep quiet so that those who want to listen may at least listen. Mr. Chairman : Honourable members will kindly allow the speaker to proceed. Babu Ramnarayan Singh : Sir, I thank my honourable friend Pandit Maitra for the encouragement he has given me. I was talking about equality. So far as the purposes of the world are concerned and so far as the continuity of the human race is concerned there is no question of equality or inequality between man and woman. Nobody can compare the hand with the feet, whether the hand is more useful or the feet are more useful, whether this eye 3 P M

DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 391 is more useful or that eye. Man and woman are one and nothing more than one. As regards law I tell my sisters throughout the country that law cannot help them. What can help everybody and also the womenfolk is love and nothing but love. Love between the pair is the only thing which can make the pair happy. Well, they may get the right of divorce. One woman may be divorced today ; other women may be coming for—marriage the next day. Monogamy may mean many-gamy; you won’t allow a man to marry a second wife. The first wife will be divorced and he will marry the second day. The third day he will divorce that wife also and on the fourth day he will marry again. The process will continue. So far as pure love is concerned for that I think character of the people is most important. We must realize that in this country the people lost their character first and then anything afterwards. So, whatever we have to do in this matter we have to regain our character. As I say that the importance of hand cannot be compared with the importance of feet, so the importance of man cannot be compared with the importance of woman. I can rather say one thing. According to our shastra they are the goddess Lakshmi—Women are called in our society Lokshmi, Saraswati, Grihalakshmi. They are anything and everything. If I may compare man with woman. I can say woman is much more important in the world than man. I can explain this further. If we remove or kill all men from the world the world will still go on. ( An honourable Member: ‘Except one man.’) Not even one man. I say if all the men in the world be killed, the world will still continue and the human race will continue. ( Honourable Members. ‘Question’). I can explain it. There are my friends who question my statement. Well, Sir, if you kill all men today there will be millions of men in the womb of the women. Women are therefore certainly more important so far as the world is concerned. But those who talk of equality between man and woman want really to separate woman from man. Instead of helping the pair to be happy they are really destructive. As I say their importance is there; they are the Lakshmi. But at the same time it is very difficult to compare man with woman. Nature has created man and woman. Their tasks are different, their duties are different and their functions are different. What is the use of comparing the two? No comparison can really stand in this case. My friends have talked about the provisions of the Bill. I shall touch only one or two points as regards the daughter’s share in the

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES392 father’s property. First of all I was a son, then a brother, then a husband and then a father and so on. Not without exception, I cannot say, but I say that almost every Hindu father—I am also a Hindu father and I also have married my daughters here and there—every Hindu father is anxious to marry his daughter in a family which is superior in status, in wealth and in many other things to his own family. Now there is a talk of share of the daughter in the father’s property. There have been jokes also. The daughter is respected in every way and is also given a share—you may call it a share—in the father’s property by way of dowry and so on and so forth. When the question of share comes what will happen is this. Ordinarily if you come to my place as a guest I may show you hospitality as my friend or this and that but if you come by way of right I do not think you will receive any hospitality from me. I tell my friends that law will not help anybody, as soon as the right for the daughter will be created in the father’s property I think all question of love will go. My friend Mr. Kamath—although he suggested many things with which I do not agree—said one thing. Here is a family in which a man has got one daughter and two or three sons. The daughter will be married several miles away. The property may be small and after the marriage when the son-in-law, the damad, will be coming to his father-in-law’s place for share of the property, or as a share-holder, he will not be respected. Everything should develop in a proper manner and in a natural way. If this measure is enacted there may be a lot of complications and litigations and the principle of pure love will be killed in our society. I, therefore, appeal to every Member in this House to consider the matter in a calm and quiet manner. As it has been suggested from several quarter in the House and as I also said before, this House is not competent to enact the measure. How is it that they are so very anxious that this measure may be passed today? Why have not the courage to wait for a year or two? May I say they are afraid of the new elections? Shri L. Krishnaswami Bharathi: No; not at all. Babu Ramnarayan Singh : The Hindu society has lived and flourished so long according to the same customs and same everything else, then, heavens will not fall if we send the measure for circulation as my friend Mr. Naziruddin has stated. I appeal to each and every Member of the House to consider the measure in a calm manner. People may be afraid of the next elections, that we Congress people may