Vol. 8 · pages 266–270
Pakistan or the Partition of India
This text was extracted automatically from the official PDF of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, so it may contain small errors. Always check the original page before quoting.
PDF page 266
241
PAKISTAN : SOCIAL STAGNATION
not novel for the religion of Islam to have that provision. If we
look up the older Acts of any nation, we will find that similar
provision also exists in other Codes as well. For the male a
severer punishment was awarded, that of death, and for females,
only the punishment of imprisonment was awarded. This main
provision was that because it was a sin, it was a crime, it was
to be punished, and the woman was to be deprived of her status
as wife. It was not only this status that she lost, but she lost
all her status in society ; she was deprived of her property and
civil rights as well. But we find that as early as 1850 an Act
was passed here, called the Caste Disabilities Removal Act of
1850, Act XXI of 1850.....
“....by this Act, the forfeiture of civil rights that could be
imposed on a woman on her apostasy has been taken away. She
can no longer be subjected to any forfeiture of property or her
right of Inheritance or anything of the kind. The only question
is that the Legislature has come to her help, it has given her
a certain amount of liberty of thought, some kind of liberty
of religion to adopt any faith she likes, and has removed the
forfeiture clause from which she could suffer, and which was a
restraint upon her changing the faith. The question is how far
we are entitled after that to continue placing the restriction on
her status as a wife. Her status as a wife is of some importance
in society. She belongs to some family, she has got children, she
has got other connections too. If she has got a liberal mind, she
may not like to continue the same old religion. If she changes
her religion, why should we, according to our modern ideas,
inflict upon her a further penalty that she will cease to be
the wife of her husband. I submit, in these days when we are
advocating freedom of thought and freedom of religion, when we
are advocating inter-marriages between different communities, it
would be inconsistent for us to support a provision that a mere
change of faith or change of religion would entail forfeiture of
her rights as the wife of her husband. So, from a modern point
of view, I have got no hesitation in saying that we cannot, in
any way, support the contrary proposition that apostasy must
be allowed to finish her relationship with her husband. But that
is only one part of the argument.
“ Section 32 of the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936, is
to the effect that a married woman may sue for divorce on the
grounds ‘ that the defendant has ceased to be a Parsi.....’
“There are two things apparent from this. The first is,
that it is a ground for dissolution, not from any religious
idea or religious sentiment, because, if two years have passed
after the conversion and if plaintiff does not object, then
either the male or female has no right to sue for dissolution
of marriage. The second thing is, that it is the plaintiff who
has got the complaint that the other party has changed the
religion, who has got the right of getting the marriage dissolved
PDF page 267 (printed page 242)
242 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
....... In addition to this Act, as regards other communities we
can have an idea of the effect of conversion on marriage tie
from the Native Converts’ Marriage Dissolution Act, Act XXI
of 1886 ........It applies to all the communities of India, and
this legislation recognises the fact that mere conversion of an
Indian to Christianity would not dissolve the marriage but he
will have the right of going to a law court and saying that the
other party, who is not converted, must perform the marital
duties in respect of him......then they are given a year’s time and
the judge directs that they shall have an interview with each
other in the presence of certain other persons to induce them
to resume their conjugal relationship, and if they do not agree,
then on the ground of desecrtion the marriage is dissolved. The
marriage is dissolved no doubt, but not on the ground of change
of faith......So, every community in India has got this accepted
principle that conversion to another religion cannot amount to
a dissolution of marriage.”
Syed Gulam Bikh Nairang, another Muslim member of the Assembly and
a protagonist of the Bill, was brutally frank. In support of the principle
of the Bill he said* :—
“ For a very long time the courts in British India have
held without reservation and qualification that under all
circumstances apostasy automatically and immediately puts
an end to the married state without any judicial proceedings,
any decree of court, or any other ceremony. That has been the
position which was taken up by the Courts. Now, there are three
distinct views of Hanafi jurists on the point One view which is
attributed to the Bokhara jurists was adopted and even that not
in its entirety but in what I may call a mutilated and maimed
condition. What that Bokhara view is has been already stated
by Mr. Kazmi and some other speakers. The Bokhara jurists
say that marriage is dissolved by apostasy. In fact, I should be
more accurate in saying—I have got authority for that—that it
is, according to the Bokhara view, not dissolved but suspended.
The marriage is suspended but the wife is then kept in custody
or confinement till she repents and embraces Islam again, and
then she is induced to marry the husband, whose marriage was
only suspended and not put an end to or cancelled. The second
view is that on apostasy a married Muslim woman ceases to
be the wife of her husband but becomes his bond woman. One
view, which is a sort of corollary to this view, is that she is not
necessarily the bond woman of her ex-husband but she becomes
the bond woman of the entire Muslim community and anybody
can employ her as a bond woman. The third view, that of the
Ulema of Samarkand and Balkh, is that the marriage tie is not
affected by such apostasy and that the woman still continues to
be the wife of the husband. These are the three views. A portion
of the first view, the Bokhara view, was taken hold of by the
Courts and rulings after rulings were based on that portion.
* Legislative Assembly Debates, 1938, Vol. V. pp. 1953-55.
PDF page 268
243
PAKISTAN : SOCIAL STAGNATION
“ This House is well aware that it is not only in this solitary
instance that judicial error is sought to be corrected by legislation,
but in many other cases, too, there have been judicial errors or
conflicts of judicial opinion or uncertainties and vagueness of
law. Errors of judicial view are being constantly corrected by
legislation. In this particular matter there has been an error
after error and a tragedy of errors. To show me those rulings is
begging the question. Surely, it should be realized that it is no
answer to my Bill that because the High Courts have decided
against me, I have no business to come to this House and ask
it to legislate this way or that way.”
Having regard to the profundity of the change, the arguments
urged in support of it were indeed very insubstantial. Mr. Kazmi
failed to realize that if there was a difference between the
divorce law relating to Parsis, Christians and Muslims, once
it is established that the conversion is genuine, the Muslim
law was in advance of the Parsi and the Christian law and
instead of making the Muslim law retrograde, the proper thing
ought to have been to make the Parsi and the Christian law
progress. Mr. Nairang did not stop to inquire that, if there
were different schools of thought among the Muslim jurists,
whether it was not more in consonance with justice to adopt
the more enlightened view which recognized the freedom of
the Muslim woman and not to replace it by the barbaric one
which made her a bonds-woman.
Be that as it may, the legal arguments had nothing to do
with the real motive underlying the change. The real motive was
to put a stop to the illicit conversion of women to alien faiths,
followed by immediate and hurried marriages with some one
professing the faith she happened to have joined, with a view
to locking her in the new community and preventing her from
going back to the community to which she originally belonged.
The conversion of Muslim woman to Hinduism and of Hindu
woman to Islam looked at from a social and political point of
view cannot but be fraught with tremendous consequences.
It means a disturbance in the numerical balance between
the two communities. As the disturbance was being brought
about by the abduction of women, it could not be overlooked.
For woman is at once the seed-bed of and the hothouse
for nationalism in a degree that man can never be.* These
* The part played by woman in sustaining nationalism has not been sufficiently
noticed. See the observations of Renan on this point in his Essay on Nationality.
PDF page 269 (printed page 244)
244 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
conversions of women and their subsequent marriages were
therefore regarded, and rightly, as a series of depredations
practised by Hindus against Muslims and by Muslims against
Hindus with a view to bringing about a change in their relative
numerical strength. This abominable practice of woman-lifting
had become as common as cattle-lifting and, with its obvious
danger to communal balance, efforts had to be made to stop
it. That this was the real reason behind this legislation can be
seen from the two provisions to section 4 of the Act. In proviso
1 the Hindus concede to the Musalmans that if they convert a
woman who was originally a Muslim she will remain bound to
her former Muslim husband notwithstanding her conversion.
By proviso 2 the Muslims concede to the Hindus that if they
convert a Hindu married woman and she is married to a
Musalman, her marriage will be deemed to be dissolved if she
renounces Islam and she will be free to return to her Hindu
fold. Thus what underlies the change in law is the desire to
keep the numerical balance and it is for this purpose that the
rights of women were sacrificed.
There are two other features of this malaise which have
not been sufficiently noted.
One such feature is the jealousy with which one of them
looks upon any reform by the other in its social system. If
the effect of such reform is to give it increase of strength for
resistance, it at once creates hostility.
Swami Shradhanand relates a very curious incident which
well illustrates this attitude. Writing in the Liberator* his
recollections, he refers to this incident. He says:—
“Mr. Ranade was there .... to guide the Social
Conference to which the title of ‘National’ was for the first
and last time given. It was from the beginning a Hindu
Conference in all walks of life. The only Mahomedan
delegate who joined the National Social Conference was a
Mufti Saheb of Barreily. Well! The conference began when
the resolution in favour of remarriage of child-widows
was moved by a Hindu delegate and by me. Sanatanist
Pandits opposed it. Then the Mufti asked permission to
speak. The late Baijnath told Mufti Saheb that as the
resolution concerned the Hindus only, he need not speak.
At this the Mufti flared up.
*26th April 1926.
PDF page 270
245
PAKISTAN : SOCIAL STAGNATION
“There was no loophole left for the President and Mufti Saheb
was allowed to have his say. Mufti Saheb’s argument was that
as Hindu Shastras did not allow remarriage, it was a sin to
press for it. Again, when the resolution about the reconversion of
those who had become Christians and Musalmans came up, Mufti
Saheb urged that when a man abandoned the Hindu religion he
ought not to be allowed to come back.”
Another illustration would be the attitued of the Muslims
towards the problem of the Untouchables. The Muslims have
always been looking at the Depressed Classes with a sense of
longing and much of the jealousy between Hindus and Muslims
arises out of the fear of the latter that the former might become
stronger by assimilating the Depressed Classes. In 1909 the
Muslims took the bold step of suggesting that the Depressed
Classes should not be enrolled in the census as Hindus. In
1923 Mr. Mahomed Ali in his address as the President of the
Congress went much beyond the position taken by the Muslims
in 1909. He said:—
“The quarrels about ALAMS and PIPAL trees and musical
processions are truly childish ; but there is one question which
can easily furnish a ground for complaint of unfriendly action if
communal activities are not amicably adjusted. It is the question
of the conversion of the Suppressed Classes, if Hindu society does
not speedily absorb them. The Christian missionary is already
busy and no one quarrels with him. But the moment some
Muslim Missionary Society is organized for the same purpose
there is every likelihood of an outcry in the Hindu press. It has
been suggested to me by an influential and wealthy gentleman
who is able to organize a Missionary Society on a large scale
for the conversion of the Suppressed Classes, that it should be
possible to reach a settlement with leading Hindu gentlemen
and divide the country into separate areas where Hindu and
Muslim missionaries could respectively work, each community
preparing for each year, or longer unit of time if necessary, an
estimate of the numbers it is prepared to absorb or convert. These
estimates would, of course, be based on the number of workers
and funds each had to spare, and tested by the actual figures
of the previous period. In this way each community would be
free to do the work of absorption and conversion, or rather, of
reform without chances of collision with one another. I cannot
say in what light my Hindu brethren will take it and I place
this suggestion tentatively in all frankness and sincerity before
them. All that I say for myself is that I have seen the condition
of the ‘Kali Praja’ in the Baroda State and of the Gonds in the
Central Provinces and I frankly confess it is a reproach to us
all. If the Hindus will not absorb them into their own society,
others will and must, and then the orthodox Hindu too will cease
to treat them as untouchables. Conversion seems to transmute
them by a strong alchemy. But does this not place a premium
upon conversion ?”