Nehru's Word: Hindu Code Bill is not against broad principles of Hindu law

To mark International Women’s Day, which we celebrated earlier in the week on 8th March, we bring to you extracts from a speech made by Jawaharlal Nehru during the first election campaign in independent India, in which he puts forward his views on the Hindu Code Bill. He explains why it is necessary to change the laws in order to improve the position of women, as the existing laws “suppress women and do not allow them to rise”. He counters the argument that the proposed changes are against the Hindu religion and argues that in fact they will make Hindu society stronger. He also expresses his disappointment at the fact that his efforts to ensure the participation of women in all spheres have not fully succeeded as the influence of men is still very strong.

"Yes, there is one other matter that I want to talk to you about specially, and that is that I have heard that in the constituency from where I am contesting in Allahabad, there are some candidates who are opposing me and one of them is Prabhu Dutt Brahmachari… He has issued a statement that he is opposing me only for one reason and that is the Hindu Code Bill.

He has also said that if Jawaharlal gives an assurance that he will give up the Hindu Code Bill, he will withdraw his candidature. Well, what he has said is very fair and I have no complaint….He has the right to say what he likes and to test public opinion on the issue of the Hindu Code Bill. I am happy that he has raised this issue because it brings to the fore what had been somewhat in the background.

I want all of you to think about this problem and give your views. I want to put my views on the Hindu Code Bill very clearly before you. There are certain principles behind the Hindu Code Bill and many details are involved. I am in complete agreement with its broad principle. The details have to be examined carefully and we are doing this.

But I am certainly in agreement with its broad principles--and not only in agreement but consider them extremely necessary. It is obvious that I cannot argue with Shri Prabhu Dutt Brahmachari on matters of the Shastras. But whatever I have read and written and from the little that I know of Indian culture and philosophy, I have understood first of all that what is known as Hindu Law is largely a matter of tradition. It is not something rigid but consists largely of traditions.

In fact, if you travel all over the country, you will find them being observed in their various forms. Even now there are completely opposite forms of Hindu law in various parts of the country. If you go to Malabar, you will find such high-class Brahmins that they consider other Brahmins as inferior. You will find laws of inheritance and marriage which are totally opposed to what you find here.

So, what I mean to say is that Hindu law is largely a matter of tradition and in a sense, it is a good thing in my opinion because a growing society is able to change itself through its traditions and not by binding itself with a rigid code.

When the British came, they could not understand traditions and so they tried to write down the law with the help of some old pundits and then there were court decisions and so the Hindu society began to be bound by them. It is strange that the Hindu society should have been tied down by the coming of people who presumably did not wish to bind them down.

It was a coincidence but with the coming of the British, Hindu society stopped changing through its traditions. Now if we wish to make any changes, we cannot change the traditions and so we have to change them by law. So it becomes necessary to change the law in our Assemblies and Parliament.

I cannot understand it when an individual says that something in the Hindu Code is against the fundamental principles of the Hindu religion because I can point out the various forms of the Hindu Code which are practised all over India. So, we must sift the principles from the overlapping traditions. This is one thing that I want you to understand.

Secondly, I think it is very essential to uplift the women of India because both legally and traditionally their condition has been bad in this country. I think a country can be judged by the status of its women. It has been my effort, as you know, to ensure the participation of women in everything, whether it is in elections or anything else.

But I feel sad that our efforts have not been completely successful. We are helpless. The influence of men is still very powerful in this country. I think that the laws and traditions in this country suppress women and do not allow them to rise. This is wrong and should be removed and that can be done only by changing the laws.

Now, the Hindu Code Bill will be left unchanged up to the extent of 80% or 90% and the rest is only being put in a legal form. There are very few differences, the main ones being in the inheritance of women, widow remarriage, etc. Bigamy will be illegal but widow remarriage permitted. In some of the provinces of India—I think in Bombay and perhaps Madras- -bigamy is prohibited. Nobody protested about the prohibition in Bombay, Madras and Baroda. So we want to introduce it all over India.

There was a loud protest that Hindu religion was being destroyed. I cannot understand it at all because in my view, instead of destroying it, this will do a special service to Hindu religion, which will progress; otherwise, the Hindu society will become weak....

The new session of Parliament will be held after three to four months. So I am trying to have the Hindu Code Bill completely examined, and if possible, to split it into different parts and take it up for examination, so that when the new Parliament meets, it can be presented, after making the necessary alterations. I consider this very important and I want you to vote on it, so that we know what you want.”

(Selected and edited by Mridula Mukherjee, former Professor of History at JNU and former Director of Nehru Memorial Museum & Library)

(This was first published in National Herald on Sunday)