________________
THE IDEAL OF INDIAN WOMANHOOD
woman? Evidentiy, the latter is the case ; for, the position they take up as politicians is undoubtcdly sound.
Hillves are not cquals--quccr arithmetic! If halves are not equal, then, they are not halves. A non-existing relation is idcalised so that the ncgation of equality may appear plausible. What is the corollary to this axiom of inystic mathematics? The partnership butween man and woman is not equal. We are lought that the Hindu ins iiuiion of marriage binds two souls in a unified cxistence. If the components are not cqual, clearly, one is more than the other. Which is the superior? The man, of course. Companionship is a myth. Man is the protector of the realier vessel which he owns. That is the law of Manu.
Why deny cquality? Have women no souls? Souls are supposed to be so many sparks of the Divine Light. Thus, to deny women cquality with mcn is a blasphemy against the fundamental tenct of Hinduis:n. But when it comes to the vital question of proprietory right, religion can go by the board, if it happens to contrarlict the most precious principle of social relations. In the feudalpatriarchal society, woman is regarded and treated as a part of man's worldly possessions. Therefore, the defenders of the ideals of ancient India cannot tolerate the talk of equality between man and woman.
But despite all the panegyrics of its fictitious
127
