590 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
The Honourable Shri K. Santhanam : Sir, I do not mind interruptions; but if those who are opposed to this Bill think that they have the monopoly of such tactics, they are mistaken. Sir, I assert with all the emphasis I can that Shri B. N. Rau is as good a Hindu as any in this House. And so far as I am concerned, I may say that my ancestors have come from very orthodox Hindus, and up to this moment we have not eaten even a little bit of fish, and I may claim to be more orthodox than. . . .
Shri H. V. Kamath (C. P. and Berar : General) : Is eating or not eating fish a test of orthodoxy?
The Honourable Shri K. Santhanam : In my part of the country eating fish is considered to be the most heterodox fashion.
Pandit Lakshmi Kanta Maitra : And in my part of the country eating iddlies and rasom is considered most objectionable.
Mr. Deputy Speaker : Let hon. Members come to more lasting things like marriages and divorce, than iddlies and fish.
Shri R. K. Sidhva : Let us not reduce the House to a fish market.
The Honourable Shri K. Santhanam : I again say that so far as adoption, guardianship, minority etc. are concerned, they are merely codification of existing law, as can be found in the judgments of British courts. Sir, whatever Manu might have written, whatever Yagnavalkya might have written, the present Hindu law is the law as interpreted in the British Courts for the last one hundred and fifty years, and against this interpretation, even Manu and Yagnavalkiya are utterly helpless. So the Hindu law now is the law as interpreted and as laid down by the British judges in this country.
An Honourable Member : British judges ?
The Honourable Shri K. Santhanam : British or Britishized judges. Therefore, Sir, I think we are at least as competent to change that law as the British Judges who have changed the ancient law into the present Hindu law as it is.
Sir, I come now to the next aspect of the Hindu Code—the unification portion of it. I am surprised that any Hindu looking to the future should say that so far as the law is concerned, no unification is necessary, that each part can have a regional law, that in Bengal we can have the Dayabhaga law, that in Malabar they can have the Marumakkattayam law and other parts the Mitakshara law and so on, that everything should be as it was in the ancient days. I cannot