Besides this, I do not know whether the Drafting Committee and its Chairman has taken any steps to ascertain the wishes of God Himself on such a vital matter. I do not doubt the sovereignty of this Assembly; but I consider, Sir, that your sovereignty does not extend to such limits as to be binding even on God. He may not be a willing party to this affair. Without ascertaining His wishes, we are associating God’s name in various places. According to Mr. Kamath’s amendment, somewhere, in the clauses we have already incorporated the name of God. We are again incorporating the name of God for purposes of swearing. Tomorrow, you are going to associate. His name somewhere in the Preamble. I am doubtful whether God will at all like this. It may be a clever piece of Constitution for you; but still He may not like this Constitution. He may not like to be associated with this Constitution. He may be a communist God or He may have strong socialist inclinations. I would ask the Members and Dr. Ambedkar, “suppose without ascertaining His wishes you incorporate His name, what would happen to the Constitution if tomorrow He in His wisdom would withdraw His consent and would refuse to be associated with this Constitution at all?” Then, I would request you, before you incorporate His name in various ways and associate Him with your Constitution, to ascertain His wishes. In case Dr. Ambedkar had no access to God, then I request you Sir, to use your good offices to ascertain His wishes and let the House know that He is a willing party to this affair. After all oath taking. means two parties, the person who swears and the Person by whom you swear. Indeed, it is a point of Order with me and I submit whether at all we can incorporate or use the name of a person who is not a Member of this House and without His consent in the Constitution. It is really of great constitutional importance. Tomorrow, the whole labour will be lost if He withdraws his consent and refuse to be associated with your Constitution.
