THE RULING PARTY'S DEFENCE OF THE MUSLIM WOMEN'S BILL 57 such issues, and the reason for bringing forward such a Bill was therefore to pacify an agitated community. He implicitly characterised the Muslim community as being unreasonable and drew attention to the contrast between the two communities by saying:"! gave the example of various personal laws with reference to the Hindu Code Bill. . . that at that time the Hindu community was prepared to accept that law. . . Whatever we might say here, outside the situation is that (Muslim) people are not prepared to accept this". Reference to "law" here being a euphemism for reform, the Minister's remarks are a not-so-subtle reminder that compared to the Hindu community which had "willingly" accepted reform, the Muslim community remains caught in the web of illogical and unreasonable faith. When a member challenged, "Has there been a consensus of the Muslim community on this Bill ?" there was expectedly no response. The Prime Minister in any case had made it clear that it was not necessary to establish whether there is a consensus, and the Law Minister had amplified this line of thinking through his fable. But compared to the rest the most parochial submission from the government side was made by K. C. Pant in the Lok Sabha that surpassed others for its ill-disguised pursuit of a line of thinking based on the theme of superiority of Hindus which implicitly describes Muslims as a backward-looking community. K.C. Pant argued, "We cannot depend only on the law for reforms. The society has to be ready for reform. The well-springs of that reform have to come from within and then the law and the sentiments that have been aroused by a certain movement, they coincide and then the society moves forward." The real meaning of this statement becomes clear when juxtaposed with something K.C. Pant said later in his speech. "And if today debate is taking place within the Muslim community about this Bill, about its desirability, about its contents, about the need for the Muslim community to do some rethinking, I would consider it a very healthy sign." And so that there would be no mistake he added, "In the Hindu society this process has been going on for decades. It had begun a a hundred years ago. As a result of that and the efforts of so many tall leaders of this country the Hmdu society has been able to regenerate itself." The suggestion is so clear that it hardly needs any elaboration. Unlike the Hindus who have reformed themselves as a result of a reform movement begun a hundred years ago, the Muslims remain where they were. Apart from the fact that the Hindu Code Bill discriminates against women on inheritance, over the years many of its other provisions have been diluted. While a recent judgement of the Supreme Court compels a woman to cohabit with her husband or face automatic divorce, by an amendment in 1976 to the Special Marriage Act, Hindus marrying under this Act will not be governed by the Indian Succession Act but by the Hindu Succession Act ! Butjeason cannot penetrate the fog of obscurantism. And through