Vol. 14, Part I · pages 541–545

DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 523 introducing a classless society of absolute equality. It will be the equality of poverty and indigence. But I do not complain of my system. And after all, this is not the place to discuss it. I only submit here that the whole subject must be considered deliberately by Hindu society and not merely viewed in the light of equality of brother and sister. That is too much of a slogan. We as serious legislators in this House should not be taken in by slogans. Here I have only given a slight hint on some of the aspects. There are many other matters but it is impossible for me to deal with all aspects. It may be that I have over-emphasised certain minor aspects, and left out others. But these are only a few observations which may make people think and not rush on, so far as the daughters are concerned. And now comes the question of equality. Is not the women sometimes superior to man in certain aspects ? I believe that she is in many spheres superior. She is the mistress of the house. She is the mistress of her husband’s soul, his purse, his property, his inclinations, his whims, every thing is controlled by her. I submit, therefore, that the women should not consider herself as ignored, merely because she is not being given a share. In fact, her position is unassailable in the family. What woman is there who is not respected and loved in the family ? Does she require anything personal ? Does she require anything herself, apart from the welfare of her husband, of his brothers and of her children and the children of her brothers? That is the Hindu system. Whether it is good or bad, it is not for me to discuss. An Honourable Member : Quite right. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : It is for the Hindu community. It is for that community to say whether the system which has lasted for over four thousand years................. Babu Ramnarayan Singh : More than that. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : It is for them to say whether it is really so rotten and so rickety—to quote Dr. Ambedkar—that it requires overhauling, that it requires breaking up and resetting, in fact whether a problem akin to that Relief and Rehabilitation has arisen in Hindu society. I feel that it is nothing of that sort. The problem is merely an intellectual upheavel. It is an abstraction of legal theory. It is an unnecessarily fine question of equality that is at the root of this division, of all this discussion and so much hostility. The whole thing is a simple affairs. Are you satisfied with your family system ? Does it give you satisfaction ? Has that system saved you from the ravages of time?

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES524 Dr. Mono Mohan Das (West Bengal : General): And that has increased the number of Muslims in the country. Mr. Speaker : Order, order. The subject before us is not the structure of society. We are discussing only certain provisions in the Hindu Code. So let us not go into too many details or go on to other questions. Otherwise I will have to ask the honourable Member to discontinue. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : If you allow shares, to the daughter, there will be wholesale evasions, and lots of cases relating to wills will come up. When the father dies, there will be wills. In fact, it will lead to lots of litigation. The sons will try to retain the property in their own hands and it may be that the dying father may be prevailed upon to execute a will under duress, or wills may be manufactured. Such things do happen. In fact, these are certain matters which have got to be considered. Sir, then there is the general aspect of inheritance. In fact, this is a matter which should be carefully considered. Then, I come to another part of the Bill, namely, marriage. In fact, with regard to monogamy. I submit that monogamy is good in theory, and good in practice also. And I also believe that numerous people would not have two wives. One is costly and troublesome enough. In fact, two wives would be a rarity. It is a rarity. I do not find two wives very common. It is extremely rare. It is only confined to very exceptional cases. Exigencies of political or economic conditions make it impossible for any one to marry two wives. But the point is whether we should try to introduce monogamy by legislation or by public opinion. There may be a tendency on the part of some men to marry two wives, not for the sake of caprice, but lor the sake of having a son. According to the Hindus, a son is needed to save the father from a certain Naraka, called puth. A person who saves you from Puth is called ‘Puthra’, the son. Otherwise the man goes to a certain hell called puth. It is a religious necessity according to the Hindus to have a son and to have a son means that if the wife is barren, he tries to marry another. It has happened within my experience, and it may be within the experience of many others that a second marriage of the husband has been brought about because the first wife is barren. I have seen very happy families, where the senior wife without a child actually induced or compelled the husband to marry a second wife, and the senior wife considered herself absolutely

DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 525 happy with the family. A similar belief in at a son is desirable is also prevalent amongst the Indian Muslims in Bengal. Mr. Tajamul Husain : I want to put a question for my information and for the information of other honourable Members. I understand that a Hindu father must have a son for his own salvation. Does a Hindu mother also require a son for her salvation ? If she does, she should have the right of polyandry. Mr. Speaker : We may have a fund of information outside the House. In the House, let us continue ourselves to the Hindu Code. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : I submit, therefore that polygamy is not as dangerous as it is supposed to be in point of view of abstract logic and abstract legislation. It has got to be considered in a particular context. If there is a desire on the part of a Hindu husband to have a child and for that purpose to marry again, and if he cannot do so for the existence of the first wife it may lead to divorce proceedings. The provision of monogamy and the prevention of a second wife during the lifetime of the first wife or during the existence of the marriage with the first wife may lead to divorces. We must not think it to be fanciful. In fact this has happened even in European countries in our history. Napoleon Bonaparte married a loving wife, Josephine. He had no children and Napoleon wanted a heir to the throne of the vast empire which he created by his own genius and what did he do ? He divorced the first wife, although his love for her was intense, but the desire for a son and the perpetuation of the family got the better of him and he married a Princess and he thought by that princely alliance with the Princess of Austria he would consolidate his power for ever and he would be happy with both. This is a historical example. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : What happened to Napoleon ? Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : He died in St. Helena—an unhappy man. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : If he had not desired the founding of an empire, he would have lived otherwise. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : Sir, This is an example from history. If a Hindu is prevented from marrying for the purpose of a son, if he thinks that a son is necessary, and if he believes his wife would not give him the son, then he would think of some evasion. He will in many cases enter into a morganatic marriage. Can you prevent a man from entering into a morganatic marriage or to commit a technical

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES526 crime in the full religious belief that what he is doing is just and proper according to his own conscience ? This would be interfering with sentiments of a people deeply immersed in religious thoughts and religious beliefs. In these exceptional cases therefore the matter should not be dealt with by legislation, but rather on public opinion. Polygamy is dwindling from within and the process must not be artifically hastened in order to create evasions. Absolute prohibition of polygamy is a defect and a practical difficulty in the way of the Bill. If a man requires a second wife, what prevents him from crossing over to Pakistan ? ( Shri Mahavir Tyagi: What about a second husband ?) The second husband is also prevalent in some places. Mr. Tyagi is well aware of this. Polygamy would be prohibited in India and you will refuse to recognise it, but the man must have a son and what prevents him from bringing the married wife—the second wife married in Pakistan—to his house and it may be that the first wife may be consenting. Would you then pass a law which is against deep-rooted sentiments and beliefs of the Hindus. There are serious matters to be considered. This is hardly a subject for drastic legislation going against the very principles, the fundamental ideas of the Hindus. The matter should be very carefully considered before we should indulge in a drastic law of this kind and then there is the provision of a penalty, legal punishment in case of a second marriage. I submit that we should not pass a law which would not be popular with our masses, which would inevitably lead to violations and evasions. We know the fate of the Sarda Act. The first effect of the Sarda Act was that many millions of infantile marriages were performed before the law would come into force. The first effect was to bring about the very mischief which it was the purpose of the law to prevent and then what is the story today. Supposing a man has a marriageable daughter, not up to the age standardized by the Sarda Act and suppose a suitable bridegroom is available, can you morally blame the father or the guardian if he contracts the marriage for the minor daughter ? Would it be merely indefensible simply because it may offend against the theoretic legal sense or the political sense of the man ? Current practices should not be made impossible all at once by law. Old practices are in consonance with the faiths and inclinations of the people. The sarda Act has largely failed and public opinion is so strong in this respect that there is hardly any prosecution against the alleged violation of the Sarda Act today. In fact legislation had been imposed by way of

DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 527 amendment and there are some difficulties in the way of a complainant. The first difficulty is that he must deposit the costs, which will be forfeited in case he loses his case and other additional difficulties are put in the way. What has happened ? Infantile marriages are still prevalent. Nobody supports infantile marriages, but it could not be stopped by criminal prosecutions or by force, unless it is supported and backed by popular sentiment. Amongst the upper educated classes infantile marriage is practically out of the question, but just look at the poor people. If unmarried girls of the poorer classes, not coming up to the marriageable age are to be left unmarried without the care and protection of a husband, it would not be a very safe thing to allow and it may be that many abuses and difficulties will arise if such girls are left without the protection of a husband. The result would be that if she is forced to wait till she attains the statutory age, a husband would not be readily available and she cannot be married readily, and this will lead to all sorts of abuses. I submit, Sir, that remembering the fate of the Sarda Act, we should also consider the idea of compulsory monogamy under all circumstances in all its rigour and without any reasonable exceptions. I think, Sir, the matter is one of serious practical consideration and not a matter of theories and slogans. I now come to the question of divorce. Divorce is not a panacea for all family unhappiness. There is hardly a man who does not have misunderstandings with his wife and there is hardly a family which does not suffer on this score. Life would be unbearable if the relation between husband and wife was all happiness. Such happiness would be no happiness. Unless happiness is punctuated by moments of unhappiness and quarrel, it will be no happiness. In fact it is these misunderstandings which are followed by re-union— virah and milan in our society—that conduces to happiness. So, misunderstandings are some times necessary. I am addressing these remarks to all experienced men. Only lunatic would be happy all his life. If he is intelligent and has a personality there will be differences of opinion, but in the long run, the wife will prevail. Therefore if you leave the couple to live together for a time, misunderstandings will be blown away as the autumn clouds. I submit therefore that we should not hastily provide for divorce. Now, the analogy of the Muslim custom is brought in. “A Muslim can divorce his wife, so, why should not the Hindu have the same right ? A Christian can divorce his wife; why should not the Hindu