DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 405
providing for equality for all in the eye of the law. Yes, we have done that. She also reminded us that we have already passed, as one of the Directive Principles of the Constitution that there should be a uniform Civil Code for the whole of this country. I am glad she gave me the starting point of my speech today. When this subject was debated a couple of months ago in another place and when it was thrashed out elsewhere informally, I registered a vehement protest against this provision, as I felt, that it was nothing but an outcome of shibboleths and slogans— a uniform Civil Code for a country inhabited by 32 to 34 crores of people professing all manner of faiths : Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism, Buddhism, Christianity ; and last but not the least, Islam! I tabled amendments that the personal law should be secure and that this was an encroachment by the Slate on the personal law of a person which the Slate had no right to make.
Maulana Hasrat Mohani (U. P. : Muslim): Hear, hear.
Shrimati Renuka Ray (West Bengal: General): That is the reason why you should support this Hindu Code.
Pandit Lakshmi Kanta Maitra : The honourable sister in front of me says that it is the reason why I should support the Hindu Code. May I say that that is the very reason why I am going to oppose the Hindu Code—one of the main reasons. You must be logical. I can understand the feelings of my sisters. Do not think that I am a hater of women, that I am a misogynist, or that I have no feeling for women. ( An Honourable Member:’ He is a married man ‘) Yes I am a married man. I have a humble wife—married according to Hindu shastric rites,— a simple, unsophisticated lady, bred up and nurtured in the ideals of our Hindu homes. ( The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: ‘What a pity’) It is a pity ! May be, but I have not much of love or liken for the lavender, lipstick and vanity bag—variety of that sex. I am happy, and I am sure out of every hundred Hindu homes, 98 have got these types of wives and are quite happy. ( An Honourable Member: ‘Why 98 ? 99.9 per cent, are so’) I am glad, a friend says it is 99.9 per cent, recurring. That enforces my argument. So I can tell my honourable friend Dr. Ambedkar that I have not felt the necessity for the drastic changes that he has sought to introduce in this Bill. ( The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: ‘Neither did I feel any’.) My honourable friend says he also did not feel the necessity. If he did not really feel any necessity for these sweeping changes, then do I take it that it was due to his megalomania that we have got this Hindu Code