Vol. 14, Part II · pages 331–335

1111 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL of supermen and giants like Jaimini. Shankar and Kumarila—I do not wish to use any adjectives of praise for them because it will be difficult to find suitable words—and on the other hand, it contains another system which is so obtuse, which is so crude, to say nothing worse, that it would refuse to see or understand anything which is not strictly before its physical eyes. The poor Charvaka, with the palm of his hand up before him, would refuse to understand that the back side of his hand also exists because it would not be pratyaksha. . . . Dr. M. M. Das : On a point of order, we have not come here to hear lectures on Hindu philosophy and ancient rishis.. . . Mr. Deputy Speaker : Order, order. I find the hon. Member is very impatient. He must have consideration for the other side of the view. I never expected that the hon. Member would go on interrupting. I repeatedly say that this is a contentious matter and we are allowing sufficient time. I am also alive to the fact that a number of hon. Members have spoken. I am not concluding the debate now. The less the number of interruptions the greater the chance that he will finish it early. Otherwise, he will demand another day. Pandit Malaviya : I was only pointing out the wide diversity and catholicity of philosophical and methaphysical thought prevalent among the Hindus. I wish there were no need at all for anybody to talk of the philosophical side of things. I wish one could feel that it was unnecessary. But, from such remarks it seems it is unfortunately necessary. What I was mentioning was that even in the Darshanas, while we have the pure Vedant on the one hand, we have the drunken reveller of a Charvaka philosopher, indulging in the five makaras ! I shall not go into those five makaras...... Some Hon. Members : Go on. go on. Pandit Malaviya : .........because apart from my own reasons of decency, probably I may take it that some of even those Members who may not be deeply interested in philosophical thought might be familiar with them ! Mr. Deputy Speaker : How are they useful for the discussion on this subject ? Pandit Malaviya: What I was trying to point out was............ Dr. Ambedkar: I submit the makaras are very useful. Mr. Deputy Speaker : Will this in any way corrupt the makaras ?

1112 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Pandit Malaviya : We have that diversity even in the principal Darshanas. Among them, again, we have the Astik Darshanas and the Nastik Darshanas. We have Darshanas which have talked of the monotheistic principle of Parabrahma and Brahma and Jiva and also which have talked of the atheistic philosophy of No-Brahma and No-Veda and No-God. We have in other spheres also equally diverse opinions and diverse state of things existing. There are some people today who find it fashionable to remind us that there were certain rishis and other among the Hindus who were beef-eaters. Side by side with that, Hinduism is replete with a universal reverential regard for the cow. We have in the Hindu society youthful marriages; we have also in the Hindu society youthful sanyasis. We have in the Hindu society the most austere and difficult to imagine tapas; we have also in the Hindu society the most luxurious and lavish enjoyment of the senses. We have in the Hindu society the Brahman ; we have the chandala ; not the Chandala for whom we have only restrictions and impositions, but the chandala for whom rights and privileges have been prescribed, just as for the Brahmans (Interruption). Mr. Deputy Speaker: It is an offence hereafter under the Constitution to call any person a chandala or an untouchable. Pandit Malaviya : There are so many speakers around all at once, that I am unable to hear you, Sir. Mr. Deputy Speaker: Apart from any constitutional aspect, reference to chandala is no longer advisable. It has been made an offence under the Constitution. Dr. Deshmukh: He is only referring to history. Mr. Deputy Speaker : There may be some history, but all history is not very good to mention. Let us forget some history. Pandit Malaviya : I was referring to it not as to an individual, but as to a system in the past. However, I will abide by what you have said. Dr. Ambedkar : Why should you ? Pandit Malaviya : The hon. Law-Minister asks, why I should. Only because I am a law-abiding Member and not the other name that I had been mentioning. I was saying that in Hindu society we have had that variety of things existing side by side in honour and in peace. That has been the great feature of Hinduism. But that catholicity and that tolerance was possible

1113 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL only because there were some basic principles, fundamentals which went to form the root of all things which were first settled and ordained, and which have been maintained through the ages without question or dispute ; not narrow sectarian dogmas or rituals, nor any controversial things or rules, but certain basic fundamental principles which were considered as sine qua non of the continued, stable and smooth existence of society. These principles may be called by any name ; but they remain the eternal bedrock upon which any healthy society must rest. In this country, the name given to these principles was sanatana : sanatoria not meaning, unfortunately, as a learned speaker said yesterday, that which is always changing and nitya nootana, but as something which has always existed. Therefore, if we undertake the task of making any changes in the structure of Hindu society, we must be careful that, tamper as much as we might with the outward forms and paraphernalia, with the leaves and branches, we do not apply the axe to the root of the tree itself; that we do not disturb and that we do not uproot the fundamentals, the basic principles upon which society has been based, and which have carried it through the ravages of time as nothing else has carried any other society known to man in the world. Therefore, we must first understand what those basic principles are. I was slightly taken aback when I heard it said by no less than three august personages who go to form the Government of this country today, that the provisions contained in the proposed Hindu Code Bill are in accordance with what is found in the Hindu Shastras. I have also heard it said that a profound study has been made of those Shastras in order that this Bill might be put up in this form. One would naturally hesitate to cross swords with men of so learned a disposition. But the Hindu Shastras have been the property of the world for the ages. Many people have read them or can read them. With the very limited knowledge that I am privileged to have of them, it has not been possible for me to find justification for that statement so far. I would, therefore, suggest that if it is the claim of the Government that they are basing the Hindu Code Bill upon the sanctions contained in the Hindu Shastras, then we should proceed on that premise. It will be different, however, if a wider stand is taken and it is said that it is not the Hindu Shastras, it is not the sanctions contained in them, but it is the wisdom and the whim and fancy of the farmers of this Bill, it is the inclinations and the desires of those who are at 12 noon

1114 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES its back, which have been the determining factors in the preparation of its clauses and details. To the best of my knowledge, no such statement has been made so far. I will, therefore, proceed on the assumption that the claim remains that the Bill and its provisions are based on the Hindu Shastras. If that is so, I would like very much to get a clarification from the Law Minister as to how that point is to be determined, as to what is said on a particular point in the Hindu Shastras and what the meaning of that statement in the Shastras is. I know what I am saying must mean mere waste of time for a man like the learned Law Minister, because, I have no doubt, that he is familiar with the meaning of what I am saying. But we the Members of this Parliament are here to legislate on a vital issue, and if we are going to legislate on a matter of such universal importance, and if we are going to do it on the basis of a certain thesis, namely, that it is being done in accordance with the tenets of Hindu Shastras. I feel that it is our duty that we the Members of this House should then keep in mind the rules, the methods, and the recognised procedure by which the meanings of the Shastras and their words are interpreted. The Mimansa applies itself to that high purpose, because in a society like that of the Hindus, where the law came not from a Government or from a Minister, howsoever high and mighty......... Shri Sidhva (Madhya Pradesh) : Please address the Chair. Pandit Malaviya : My hon. friend Shri Sidhva asks me to address the Chair. I have been doing nothing else. I wish Mr. Sidhva would not forget so easily. The Members of this House should know that in a society like that of the Hindus where everything has been based—for, God only know how many millions and millions of years, or thousands and thousands of years—upon certain texts coming down through the ages; where we had not the printing presses or the printing paper, where everything had to be committed to memory and had to be passed down from the teacher to the pupil and from the sire to the son, where everything depend upon the correct pronunciation and intonation and upon the correct text and upon the correct interpretation of old and ancient words and mantras, where new codes and new treatises, not printed on paper, but in the minds and memories of men came up from time to time and had to be assigned their right importance and place; in such a society, disaster would have followed if the most minute, if the most exhaustive and positive rules had not been laid down for the

1115 DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL interpretation of those texts. And in the Mimansa we have it laid down how any text of the Srutis or the Smritis should be interpreted. It is also laid down that the meaning of the law cannot be known merely by looking at a sentence at one place. So many tests—proving tests— have to be applied to it. [pandit thakur daS Bhargava in the Chair ] If, therefore, it is the claim of the government that the Hindu Code Bill is based on principles and tenets contained in the Hindu Shastras, my earnest request is that we should carefully and according to the rules, examine the various provisions and then find out if they violate what is contained or laid down in the Shastras or not. My humble submission is that they are not only not in conformity with Hindu Shastras, but go diametrically against them. ( Interruption) Somebody is saying at my back that I am now expanding. I wish my friend would understand that if I wished to expand these ideas it would take days to finish. Shri Munavalli: That is your intention also. Pandit Malaviya : We have known of the concept of omniscience. I find that there is a new phenomenon of it here, who knows the minds of others. Shri Munavalli: Certainly. Pandit Malaviya : I congratulate the hon. Member. I wish to submit that I am trying to confine myself as rigidly as possible to the shortest possible limit. I am saying this with a sense of responsibility. Let any Member of this House who would like to have an exhaustive and expanded exposition of the points I have made, let him do me the honour of coming to me after this sitting and I will then make him see how much there is to say, how much there is to study, and ponder over each one of the points that I am only briefly mentioning here. I was submitting that if we have to go by the Shastras the whole matter simplifies itself, because there will then be no room for any difference or controversy. If the two parties to a case have agreed upon a measuring rod and there is no dispute about it, it should be easy then for any set of normal people to take up that yardstick and measure the cloth to the mutual satisfaction of both. If it is agreed that it is on the basis of the Shastras that we are going to enact this law, according to the rules of interpretation so clearly laid down, it should be easy for anybody and the hon. Law Minister to sit down, go through clause