Vol. 14, Part I · pages 721–725

DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 703 Our friends from Travancore and Cochin are far advanced but they should also keep in mind that a solitary swallow will not make summer. They should make the villagers also pace with them and if they also are to be taken along then kindly give this Bill more publicity and explain it to them the various implications and then the purpose will surely be achieved. There is not the least doubt about this fact. At places it is being said that by passing this Bill a reversed state of affairs is being created, and to some extent this allegation is right also. Let the water trickle down its natural course and if by spurning the minority view point here you would reverse the state of affairs then today you may be able to do so; but in future a time will come when such drastic changes would be made therein that would stun you speechless. The inevitable must come to pass. I do not like to go in details. I wish to say one thing more that our Smritikar (law giver) Yagnyavalkya has gone a step ahead of Manusmriti. Even I do not want to enter into the controversy as to which of the Manus has been the author of this Manusmriti because there have been a number of Manus. But Shri Vigyaneshwar, the famous annotator of Yagyavalkya Smriti, who has written the Mitakshara annotation and the annotators who have written Dayabhag and Mayukh annotations have propounded different and distinct opinions. I do not want to quote all the illustrations. But they have laid down that if a woman be not given her stridhan then she also should get a share in the property equal to that of the son. This has expressly been mentioned. I wish to say with all the emphasis at my command that in our Smritis a mention is made of stridhan. The people of England have not yet codified their law. I wish to inform you that according to the English Book of Prayers the prohibited degrees of relationship for marriage were determined in 1565 A. D. The same continued to be in force till 1915 A. D. and in 1915 A. D. only one alteration was made in the prohibited degrees of relationship viz., till now a marriage could not be consumated with the wife’s sister. So I wish to say that we have stepped far ahead as compared to this. There they took so many years to change one degree of prohibited relationship but here according to the Civil Marriage Act the people have been permitted to enter into matrimonial alliance with the second cousins also. Those who like many take recourse of Civil Marriage, but why you want to impose the same restriction on all others. The Civil marriage Act provides for marriages

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES704 with second cousins. Those who wish to adopt the system may follow it. While framing this Bill we should keep in mind the Principle of Eugenics also. It is wrong to consider that our Smritikars (annotators) have mentioned nothing at random. Our Smritikars were past-masters of the Science of Eugenics. They were not common people. They were highly learned and well informed persons. Whatever doctrines they laid down were perfect in all respects and were propounded after mature consideration. Their decrees were so perfect that it was not at all deemed essential to effect any changes in them say after 6, 8, 10 or 12 months. Our Smritikars were very wise and intelligent. Deep meditation of hundreds of years is essential to suggest any changes in what they have written. Undoubtedly you may make suitable amendments there in, because from time to time suitable amendments have been made in these Smrities. But we must consider this fully well whether by introducing these changes the society will be benefitted or put to loss. Shri H. V. Kamath (C. P. and Berar : General): Are the Hon. Members of this House not intelligent? Mr. Deputy Speaker : Please go on. Shri Gokulbhai Daulatram Bhatt : I am not so intelligent and learned as Shri Kamath is. I do not allege that the Hon. Members here do not possess intelligence. Everybody has got his own intelligence. Everybody can think. But I say that I will not accept lying down all that Dr. Ambedkar says in a manner that great men have great views. Similarly if any Pandit (scholar) were to come and say that whatever has been done for the untouchables is not at all justified, then also I will not take his word for granted because I do not believe in the maxim that great men have great views. But I was submitting that whatever our Smritikars have done, have done after fully taking into consideration the future of the society. It is quite true that these Smrities were codified according to the then needs of the society. Today our society consists of numerous castes and sub-castes, the people belong to different sects, they believe in various doctrines, there are Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists and followers of other schools of thought and so on. They are divided up into numerous religious sects. It is not an easy task to inter-blend them in a single system. Sir, I will now take only a little more time. I had just stated that the honourable Dr. Ambedkar said, “Custom will eat into the code

DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 705 and therefore custom should not prevail” On the other hand he says that the law governing the succession rights of Rulers and jagirdars, which should not be there, should continue; and when there is a question of usages and customary rights, he says that this should not be there. There is the point of succession. Another point is that of adoption where he says that customs and usages should not be allowed to continue. Both these things are untenable. You had better put an end to it, make it uniform or abolish it outright. Sir, I would again bring it to your notice that petty conferences are being held at other places on account of which I am feeling some difficulty in speaking. An Honourable Member : He is repeating the same arguments. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar (Minister of Law): It is now one hour since the gentleman has been speaking. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Order, order. The best way of asking him not to speak longer is not to make noise but to leave him alone so that I may ask him to complete his speech early. The Hon. Member knows that many other Members are anxious to speak. He has already taken more than 45 minutes. Shri Gokulbhai Daulatram Bhatt : Shri I am indebted to you. So I was telling you that on the one hand you say that the custom is no problem, these customs and usages should continue; on the other, if this is acted upon it would tantamount to kill the Hindu Code. I do not want both these things. You ask as to grow more food. If we have to grow foodgrains in all the land in our possession, be it a garden or beautiful lawns, we must cultivate all these lands. On the one land; you want that your lawns should also remain intact, and on the other, you desire that more foodgrains should be grown. Such a course does not appeal to me. You know what is custom ? We should understand family customs. village customs and national customs— ’Shastrad ruri balysi ’ (Custom overrides the sacred laws). What is the meaning of Shastral ? By referring to shastras again and again you people would be thinking that I am raving like a maniac. The Shastra is a science, a treatise and a law. That is a Smriti. After this you will not like to appreciate any such thing. So he will not like to involve himself in any such controversy which the divorce problem has created. A man and a woman sit in a Panchayat and say that they want to get rid of one another. They say that they have enjoyed the pleasures of the world and want to go to some other place. They will not involve themselves

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES706 in such a botheration of having a recourse to the District Court or High Court for this purpose. If they behave in such a manner the reverse will be the case. When I go to the village, I will tell the people that the Hindu Code Bill has been framed in such a manner and it contains a provision of such like matters. Those people will then say that they do not want this in such a form. The existing village Panchayats are quite good and these should be allowed to carry on as they are doing at present and they do not want to involve themselves in such complications of law which will enable the lawyers to thrive and the poor to become poorer. With your blessings, all these things abundantly exist in the Hindu law. Sir I was just saying what is likely to be the net result of all such things. I cannot touch here every aspect because I have not got sufficient time at my disposal that I should refer to all such things, as many of my brethren are desirous of speaking on it. So Sir, I was just going to say that this is a question of vital importance. I would advise my honourable friends sitting here who have expressed their opinion in favour of its being passed to consider it once again more carefully. This is not the time for hasty action. You are liable to be called to account by the people for your doing of it. With all due respects, I would also like to request our esteemed leader the honourable Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru that this question which has been brought up before us is so vital and of such a fundamental importance that we should necessarily consider over it most carefully. All the more necessary that the public opinion should be elicited in this matter. My honourable sister Shrimati Renuka Ray had referred to a referendum. In this connection I would like to say that as the elections are likely to be held in the near future, you can at that time elicit the opinion of the measses whether or not they want the Hindu Code. You can place it before the public that we are framing a Hindu Code Bill of this nature and whether or not they like it. If you are able to enlist the opinion of the people on this issue, then you are at full liberty to pass it in this House. This should be agreed upon as the basis of referendum. I am not a man to be swayed over by the newspaper reports. The newspapers are given to the publication of exaggerated versions of such matters simply to promote their circulation. I have got no personal grudge against the newspaper men. I cherish solicitude for them and have every sympathy with them. But so far as the question of holding a referrendum is concerned,

DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 707 I would like to tell my honourable sister Shrimati Renuka Ray, who is not present here at the moment and other sisters that as elections are likely to be held after a few months, this question can then be placed by them before the public. You can tell the people that we have framed such a Hindu Code Bill and want to pass it. If the people vote in your favour on this issue, then we can surely pass it here. Thus, I would like to request the Government to consider over this matter and not to pass it at this moment. To conclude, I would say this much, “Not to the left, not to the right, come in the middle to find out the golden mean.” Shri R. K. Sidhva (C. P. and Berar : General): Sir, My friend has mentioned the Parsi Matrimonial Act. Will you kindly give me five minutes to explain? Mr. Deputy Speaker : I am not going to allow it because he did not criticise it in any manner. He said the Parsi Marriage Bill was sent round to all persons all over the world. He used that as an agrument in the case of this Bill which involves three hundred millions people. Therefore on that ground the Hon. Member cannot claim a right to speak. Shri R. K. Sidhva : No. Sir, He has made incorrect statements. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Then the Hon. Member must have brought it to my notice. We cannot start an argument over every matter. Shri R. K. Sidhva : Have I no right to speak on this Bill ? Mr. Deputy Speaker : Every Member has a right to speak, I have absolutely no doubt about it. Only time does not seem to permit. * Dr. Bakhshi Tek Chand (East Punjab : General): Sir, the debate on the Bill has gone on for several days. Both sides of the question have been put before you. I do not want to repeat the arguments which have been given on the one side or the other. I have only two submissions to make, one to the supporters of the Bill and one to opponents of the Bill and after that I have to place one suggestion for consideration of the House for such changes as I think should be made in the Bill to make it acceptable to all or at any rate to a large part of the House and also of the country. I will ask the indulgence of the House therefore for a few minutes to permit me to place my views before it. The first suggestion that I have to make to the opponents of the Bill is this. They say that this House is not competent to touch the *C.A. (Leg.) D., Vol. VI, Part II, 14th December 1949, pp.585-99.