DR. AMBEDKAR AND THE HINDU CODE BILL 1271
Now I would refer to another text of Hindu Law—I mean that law as it prevails at present. Yajnavalkya says :
यस्मिन् देशे य आचारो व्यवहार: कुलस्थिति: । तथैव परिपात्यो सौ ।।
That is to say, whatever customs, practices or family usages prevail in the country shall be preserved intact. And the Vyavastha or rule in this connection is stated thus :
येषां परम्परा प्राप्ता पूर्वजैप्यनुष्ठिता । त एव तैर्न पुष्येदु: आचारैर्नरे पुन: ।।
They are not liable to censure, whose predecessors used to practise these usages. In modern language, it means that the customs are ancient and from time immemorial. And others which are not so would not be observed.
So with this Vyavastha, the Hindu religion was vitalising itself and adopting itself to different regions.
Now, I shall take a small illustration and show that if we entirely do away with customs by accepting this amendment what would be its effect. There are many reasons why the amendment should not be so accepted. First of all, I trust even the learned Law Minister is not conversant with all the good usages that are prevalent in this country from Cape Comorin in the south to the Himalayas in the north. Neither are the Members conversant with all of them. And even if they are, they would not be in a position either to convince the learned Doctor or to convince the other Members of the House of the utility or significance of those usages and of the importance in which those usages are held in particular parts of the country. Therefore, I tried in an amendment of mine, which was for a technical reason not accepted or not put forward, to provide a simpler device by which the local Legislature may be able to supplement this law. That, however, has gone. Therefore, I submit that because of ignorance of all the good usages in the country we should not say “save as otherwise provided in the provisions ……….”. The effect of this saving clause will be nil and part (a) of the amendment will do away with all good customs, whether they are repugnant or not to the law.
According to part (b) only those laws which are inconsistent with the present law are only repealed, whereas in the case of customs, whether repugnant or otherwise, they have all been abrogated. This is a very wide provision which should be lost if it is omitted altogether. A custom is governed by all the requisite qualifications mentioned in clause 3, which the house has already passed and laws would be governed by article 254 of the Constitution.