Vol. 14, Part II · pages 156–160

936 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES be in consonance with the western system where as soon as the boy comes of age he marries and goes away. The girl also marries and goes away. The old people have to be looking at each other’s face ! Do we want that kind of animal life in our country ? I have no quarrel with the rest. It is a misfortune that the individualism is in excelsis. The husband and the wife are one unit and they ought to protect the old people. Our joint family system was brought about by our ancients many years ago and that is a natural unit and there the father, mother, the son and grandson all of them go together. I say that this is a happy unit where unemployment never existed. People who talk of socialism and communism pay lip sympathy and I say that this tendency is the germ of Socialism. The husband in a particular family works for the maintenance of his own children on the one side and for the maintenance of the older people on the other side. In Madras after this marriage-divorce law was passed 38 applications were filed, (interruption) Boys alone can marry and no girl can marry a boy. Out of these 38 applications for divorce, 30 applications were filed only by the husbands. The Deputy Minister of Food and Agriculture (Shri Tirumala Rao) : Are they from the middle-class ? Shri M. A. Ayyangar : Most of them were from middle-classes, most of them were educated men, unfortunately in western style. As I said, the majority of the petitions were from husbands. I think there was only one case where a woman was said to be sterile. I would bring that under this Code. One other case was the husband, an educated lawyer and he is employed in Bombay. He gets Rs. 100 as salary. The girl is employed somewhere as a Doctor getting Rs. 400. The girl wants the husband and the husband wants the wife. The only pull was that the wife wants the husband to come and live with her and the husband wants the wife to come and live with him. After marriage this trouble has been going on between the husaband and wife for three years. The husband said : “How long am I to be without her company” and the Court found that it was a case of desertion by the girl and they dissolved this marriage. I ask all my sisters here present and others outside, in a widow re-marriage after the husband’s death nobody knows whether the man has not touched the woman before her re-marriage. Even after this the widow-re-marriage has not progressed considerably. (Interruption). My friend says that what I say is a lecture. What my friend says is all truth. The Widow re-marriage Act was passed long ago but still it requires a lot of persuasion.

937 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL There was an hon. Member of the Assembly—he was a Member from Bengal—and he brought a single clause Bill which stated that no widower shall marry a spinster. His idea was that a widower may marry at least some widows and when some of our friends poohpoohed the idea, he withdrew the Bill and said that he committed a mistake. When once a man has learnt that a woman has been divorced, would that woman be touched as a wife and married again as a wife ? I do not want the society to be disrupted in that manner to suit the few conveniences here and there of some individuals. There are difficulties but the other difficulty is far more appalling than this difficulty. I was told this morning that some delegation is coming from Pakistan for the purpose of recovering abducted women. Have you ever heard of an ‘abducted man’ ? Nature has so made us that without the husband and the wife, there is no unity in this world. Even among the Patagonians the wife is as tall as the husband. In any other community the male is taller than the woman. Is it good if I talk like a woman with a squealish voice and a woman goes on talking like a man. Therefore I must be a man and a woman must be a woman. I see I am evoking laughter of my friends but I feel that God has made the best arrangement by creating a happy family in which the parents will be protected, the minor children will be protected. The affection is not as a result of wealth. Love and affection must flow of its own and it does not depend upon money at all. Most of us are poor and we marry and get a son and in our old age he takes charge of the management of the household and we feel that since we have discharged the responsibility to the aged parents, similarly he will maintain us in our old age. Sanction has the mighty force. That old law has much greater sanction than any other law which has prevailed so far for the last 3,000 years. When I become a member of parliament you do not allow me to sit here unless I take the oath of allegiance, but so far as this marriage is concerned, I ask you all, are you to displace these old customs such as taking hold of a woman, taking her hand and placing her feet upon straw and saying that “our hearts are placed together like the Ganges and Jamuna” ? This is not such a drab affair. Is it for the purpose of conjugal facility that a man is marrying and a woman is marrying ? Our ancient scriptures enjoined it for the purpose of a happy married life and for the purpose of a good progeny. It is

938 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES not open to me to leave a legacy of blind, lame and dumb children to the rest of the community and ask them to take charge of them. Even among race-horses we talk of pedigree and for humanity alone any man can marry any woman and still expect the children to be perfect angles. The new marriage that is proposed will be like tying a race-horse to a lame donkey. Jayaswal an able commentator of Hindu Law said that our ancients had big herds of cattle and they were also anxious to have first-class progeny so that they may take charge of the rest of the community. That is an honoured practice of our country. Hitler also wanted a good progeny for his country. Even Mussolini got a number of marriages celebrated in his country. We say in or Sastras : “Aputrasya gathirnashthi” ; “Punnamno Narakadyasmath thrayathe pithatram suthah”. That is, the son saves the father from the Naraka called puth. It is that sanction that has produced a lot of children in our country. Otherwise, we would have had to give a hundred pounds to every mother to get children. Are we to pooh-pooh this culture ? What makes me say all this is that it is unfortunate that the Chairman of the Rau Committee is a gentleman who did not marry according to the Hindu law, Many of the Members of the Select Committee were not married according to the Hindu Law ; some were bachelors who did not marry at all. Shri Kesava Rao (Madras) : Who says that they were not married ? Mr. Speaker : Order, order. I think we are having this discussion a little beyond scope. Shri M. A. Ayyangar : I will come within the scope of the Bill. Mr. Speaker : He has already taken more than 35 minutes ; I am afraid it is rather too long. He may be short and to the point. Shri M. A. Ayyangar : I am only referring…….. Shri Thirumala Rao : The reference is too personal with regard to the personnel of the Committee. Shri M. A. Ayyangar : After all, let it not be said outside that that is quality opinion ; it is only a question of personal opinion. I am as much aggrieved about this. Am I to bow down when it is said of the Smritikartas that they had absolutely no business to go on changing the smritis ? What else are we doing ? We are passing a law in the morning ; we are amending it in the afternoon. The smritikartas wanted to change the smritis according to the changed

939 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL circumstances. They are tabooed as archaic persons. If they have changed, they are equally condemned for having changed. Why are there so many smritis ? Each is addressed to particular branch of law. My point is this. The reverence that is due in a change of law of this magnitude is not there. We are looking at the question from a different point of view. I submit that by means of this legislation Hindu society is cut vertically, horizontally, diagonally, into bits and bits. You say, let a man say, “I do not belong to Hinduism”. Even the wording “professing the Hindu religion” is obnoxious. Why do you call yourself a Hindu ? What is there in Hinduism ? There are certain things ; there is the doctrine of Karma which even the Buddha and the Jaina believed. The Vedas are not peculiar to me. I believe in the hoary antiquity of the Vedas as an inspired document. Do not the Muslims believe that there is a Veda. Even the Sikhs who belong to a reformist religion, worship a Book. Why should I be ashamed of my Vedas and of calling myself a Hindu ? Whether I am a Brahmo samajin, or arya Samajam or a Vaishnav, if I do not believe in the Vedas, I am not a Hindu. Unfortunately, in this country, religion has entered into politics also. It is said that on account of these vicissitudes of castes and creeds, so many Muslims became converts. I ask, was there not one religion in China, Buddhism; was there not one religion in Indonesia, Buddhism ? Where is Buddhism in Indonesia today : Where is Buddhism in Malaya? Were not a number of people converted to Islam in China ? Again and again, wherever there is any difficulty you attack Hinduism and say that it is this ancient system that is responsible for all this. I say, the remedy is elsewhere. Apart from its disadvantages, it is the Hindu system of marriage and not allowing a divorce, of property not being dissipated by division amongst daughters also, who have no responsibility to maintain the family, etc., that has been the source of strength to the people. I would ask a simple question. If the daughter gets married, do you ask me to live with my son or my son-in-law ? It is said : “Jamatha dasamo grahah” , the son-in-law is the tenth planet. I must be supported by somebody in my old age. Why not live with the son instead of the son-in-law ? What happens if you give a share to the daughter ? Of course, she will say, “Come and live with me”. But, my fate will be that of King Lear. I am appealing to all mothers and sisters to anxiously and seriously consider the situation. Let them not be under the impression that I have not consulted my partner at home. We have deliberated for a long time.

940 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES In these circumstances, I say, let us go slowly. Whoever wants to have liberal views, let him have his own way of life. Incidentally, I may say that sati is opposed to morality ; that was rightly put down. You say this is an enabling provision. Why don’t you say that a brother may marry a sister ? That would also be an enabling provision. Up to certain limits we can go ; beyond limits, we ought not to go. We should not allow incest. The question is whether the marriage should be beyond three degress or seven degrees. I have also read some books on genetics. New things are being discovered. They say there are three kinds of blood and that one does not agree with another. I have also read astrology in the old school. They say that before marriage you must consult the Rajju, Sarpa, and Gana agreement. This Gana seems to have been discovered by the westerners. The late Dr. Rabindranath Tagore was a great poet; but we recognised him as a great poet only after the westerners recognised him. Similarly we want somebody from the west to come and say that marriages should be only of a particular order and that the points in the old smritis are very good. I am a conservative in the sense that I do not want to leap before, I know that the other ground is steady and strong I would only urge upon this House to stick on to whatever has endured you for such a long time. Before I finish, I would like to refer to one other aspect of the question, that is the Marumakkattayam law. They are all intellectuals ; practically in the Secretariat, every Secretary is a Menon, coming from Malabar. I am proud of them. They have got a different way of life. Ask them if they are more happy. Why don’t you impose this law on them also ? Take the Aliyasanthana Law. You may think that it is opposed to all nature, where a man visits his wife and the wife remains in her .house, where the children are maintained by the mother and her brother, not by himself. To you it may appear strange. Natural affection is different. Would I embrace my sister’s sons with more affection, then my own ? Well that is their law and we are allowing them to continue under this law. But, when my hon. friend Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava says that there are certain customs in the Punjab, you say that they should be thrown overboard because my hon. friend is not so vociferous. After all, it is a wrong principle of jurisprudence. Law does not go in advance of custom. It is a human institution. It is something like saying that grammer does not go in advance of language. A child learns to speak first and then comes in grammer. It is a wrong principle of jurisprudence to say that custom is a wrong