Home Blog Page 128

Modi’s India: An India that prospers amidst chaos

0

Another accolade from India! This is a new India that we’re seeing. An India that prospers amidst chaos. An India that has the world’s fastest growing economy. An India that kills over 150 terrorists in record time. An India that doesn’t take cowardice lightly, but returns despicable attacks by retaliating with full force, showing the enemy who’s on top. 

And don’t ask me to confirm these statements. Ask the United States to. Ask Brazil to. Ask Russia, Nigeria, Greece and France how much they love India in the past few years. BBC polls will show you. Why the United Kingdom and South Africa love collaborating with the Indian government. And why Singapore and Italy to name a handful, are in love with India and its way of governance.

An honourable, dependable supporter of women and their rights (triple talaq, Rs.1 sanitary pads to name a few initiatives), a man who believes in inclusiveness and equality (just look at the Dalit representation in his cabinet), a man who is as perseverant as any (from tea seller to a living legend), a man who always has one eye on the youth and education (Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao, The New NEP, Start-up incentives and initiatives), a man who always puts his country first, be it through surgical strikes, through introducing goods and services made in India, through strengthening our culture and tradition, through building airport after airport in UP, to restoring public faith and trashing the stereotype that all politicians are corrupt, Modi ji has showed us the way, working 18 hours a day, reducing inequalities, increasing opportunities, developing the nation at breakneck speeds, he deserves more than the appreciation he’s gotten today.

Which LEGEND would take foreign relations to such a height that countries would partner with us to make the vaccine for the Novel Corona Virus? Which person would make India’s economy the fastest growing (agreed it’s down not but wait and watch, the number of investments and development taking place, innumerable jobs will be generated)? Which person would take bold decisions to reduce terrorism significantly in Kashmir by the abrogation of Article 370?

You want to protest, go ahead. You want to display his portraits on the gutter, go ahead, you want to openly spread hate, please do so. Remember, the amount of development Modi has instructed and introduced, your governments, in 70 years of ruling, couldn’t do one-one thousandth of what’s taking place now. Those who want to call today National Unemployment Day, go ahead, make these derogatory and demeaning remarks. Modi has introduced more jobs than you can count.

Remember this. In 2013 and prior, you asked the world who India’s leader was, they wouldn’t know. You asked them how India was, they’d picture a slum and a boy wearing a torn baniyan, depicting poverty and underdevelopment at its peak.

You go ahead and ask them now; they see India as a superpower. As a country that is so developed, it gets China to apologize. A country so prosperous, prime ministers world over come to visit, hailing Modi. The elections in the United States are fought, Modi’s name surfaces. The world in 2020, doesn’t know India as a slum anymore. It’s knows India as a powerful, developed and sensational country. A country that has a vision. A country that will FOREVER prosper.

I am proud to be भारतीय under the prestigious, honourable prime minister Sri Narendra Damodardas Modi.

#modihaitohmumkinhai #sabkasaathsabkavikas #abkibaarmodisarkar #modifor2024

Jai Hind!!!

Mr. Farooq Abdullah, being Kashmiri is being Indian, period

“China will help us bring it back”, he said, remorselessly. Shamelessly. A man who says “Kashmir Kya tumhare baap ka Hain”, a man who transforms himself into an advocate for militants who decimate innocents, and a man who panders to the enemy at every single opportunity he gets, Farooq Abdullah, who is astonishingly, a member of parliament, has no right to call himself an Indian. Sitting on the very tolerant Indian soil that gave birth to him, fully exercising the rights he has been awarded as a sitting member of parliament, what does Farooq think of himself?

Seeking, or rather demanding the intervention of an enemy who, decimate and strip apart the Uighur Muslims to shreds, Abdullah, I think, has no right to call himself a nationalist anymore. A man who decides to become an advocate for the terrorists, a man who keeps mum when Khulbhushan Jadhav is treated with malice and a man who suggests us to resume conversation with a country that murders for fun, Farooq Abdullah, an eighty two year old Member of Parliament and former Chief Minister of the State had absolutely no moral right to say what he said, thoroughly insulting and trashing the integrity and sovereignty of the very country that provided him shelter.

It is indeed appalling. Both, how he finds the gumption and audacity to say these malicious statements and how most of us, apart from the mindless supporters of this traitor, choose to not speak up for our country and instead, watch as he invites the very country we have been battling against, to come, break open our boundaries and rule the country, not to mention try to restore a dead Article 370, that was, if you didn’t know, temporary.

How long will we let this go on? How long will this state of misusing freedom of speech go on? How long will we face this state of embarrassment where members of parliament please our enemies through these derogatory and demeaning remarks against our very own native land? We have been tolerating it for decades. Centuries, to be precise. But the time has come now to put a stop to it. To draw a final line though Farooq has crossed all of them already. The time has come to become a hardliner for your nation, demand from the current government that he is thrown into the most unnerving and nerve-racking prisons and put an end to the disgraceful comments our country has been at the brunt of, protect and avenge our mother India by showing these goons their place.

In an attempt to appease separatist forces, it is not uncommon hearing these words from Abdullah’s mouth. It is not uncommon that we see the ungrateful bunch of hooligans who sing and dance for the enemy taking advantage of India’s kindness. Heck, we see the Indian National Congress do that every day. Sambit Patra wasn’t surprised when the Vadra-Congress, now a sinking ship in terms of even existing as a political party, backed Abdullah’s seditious statement and I’m sure the public wasn’t either.

To watch day by day as a party that was once governed by legends, deteriorate to this stage is shocking and abnormal. Yet, them supporting the likes of Farooq, who openly condemn and despise our motherland is perfectly alright. It is a shame that the INC, the foundation of our freedom struggle still wants to hold on and clench the long rope that we have given them despite their atrocities.

But that being said, it was Farooq from the so-called National Conference and not the fifty-one-year-old adolescent Rahul Gandhi who said these words. It was Abdullah who kept changing his goalposts, who sometimes, even for the sake of a seat in the parliament, sang Ram-Dhun. But inevitably, as always, the question falls on the Congress party. Who are they trying to defend and support? Who are they welcoming and what kind of ludicrous statements do they accept in lieu of merely opposing the ruling party? In process of opposing the Modi Govt., will they go on to familiarize themselves with these ignominious statements?

Who are they defending? Are they defending a man, who on the 19th of September, advocated for the nine Al-Qaeda operatives nabbed by the NIA in Bangalore and Kolkata and sought that India ought to resume dialog with Pakistan? Or are they defending a man who declared stone pelters as freedom fighters? A man who is a threat to public safety? Or, are they defending a man who has called India ‘dead’? An individual who called Burhan Wani a hero? A man, who said that 5th August 2019 was the final nail in the coffin of India, after stating that Kashmir would get independence only if abrogation takes place, thus, boldly communalizing the abrogation of Article 370?

The question is to be posed to the INC as to why they support these despicable individuals, why they continue to tarnish their image and why they continue to mindlessly, not oppose the ruling party, but in lieu of opposing the party’s every move, decide to side with ludicrous, anti-national statements? Why does the Congress Party decide to side with a man who says that there will never be peace in Jammu and Kashmir, who says that Kashmiris don’t feel Indian and takes pleasure in uttering plenty more irrational statements yet still participates in the elections in lieu of his perks, his salary and his position? The ball is in the Congress’ court now, and they ought to answer these pertinent questions.

Coming to the defendant, the individual the Congress Party is defending so vigorously, Farooq Abdullah, who couldn’t even be loyal to Kashmiris, a man who has taken part in election rigging, a man who is corrupt, who wants Article 370 to act a shield and exempt him from being transparent about funds, a man who has taken hundred crores from the Cricket Association, a man who is one of the biggest hypocrites, a huge anti-national, and an MP who has failed to live up to his oath. Has he forgotten the oath he took, when he pledged, as a Member of Parliament to always uphold the sovereignty and integrity of the country? How much leeway and latitude do we give such absconding individuals? How many lines do we let them cross before we put an end to this once and for all? Before we stop such ludicrous, ridiculous and such insane comments? Isn’t this the death of Indian Democracy?

Personally, I feel that traitors like Farooq Abdullah have been given too much freedom. To sit in this kind, giving country, and present himself as an advocate for the enemy, what more is left of Farooq Abdullah? He takes advantage of the extremely flexible levels of freedom of speech, and insults the integrity of the country. He thinks he can say whatever he wants and get away with it. But I pity him for he couldn’t be more wrong. Because this isn’t the India that will tolerate this nonsense. This isn’t the India that will take this sitting down and give the freedom it has given to these traitors. This new India will not tolerate these insane and completely seditious comments against the land.

I used the word insane above, for I feel quite upset looking at the plight of Abdullah. It is unfortunate that he has not a crumb of knowledge regarding the very Article he wants China to re-establish. Farooq Abdullah has no clue regarding the birth of Article 370. He doesn’t know that the Article was temporary, he pays no heed to the fact that the amendment was done in a Constitutional manner, and he fails to recognize the importance of the speech the honourable MP of Ladakh gave in the Lok Sabha, highlighting the very importance of the abrogation. He then fails to take note of how the honourable Supreme Court itself has upheld the decision.

Does Mr. Abdullah place himself above the Supreme Court? Does he place himself above the law? We can only draw inferences that he is unable and incapable of digesting the feats of the legislation. But that is not all. Not only is he thoroughly uninformed regarding the Article he is defending, who has he asked to help him with this ungodly task? Who is it that he has asked to stand by him when he plans to bring back an Article from the dead?

He has asked the torturers. The ones who have no locus standi whatsoever. The ones who dole out excruciating and agonizing pain to the Muslims. The ones who slaughter, decimate and destroy the Uighur Muslim race. The ones who put the Uighur Muslims into these horrendous detention camps and then beat them up black and blue, not allowing them to do their namaz, who cane innocent women and children mercilessly, all due to the fact that they are Muslim. The despicable people who tell them that if they agree to sign a paper stating that they would not “be” Muslim anymore, the beatings would stop. And yet, shamelessly, this MP has gone and said that he would prefer to be ruled under China?

Now that we have got the irrational choice in choosing someone to fulfil his nonsensical wish out of the way, let’s come to the timing. As I write this piece, there are more than 60,000 Chinese troops on the Eastern side of Ladakh. A conflict could arise any moment. And yet, this politician, a former Chief and Union Minister, aware of the situation, makes such cheap comments? What does he think of himself?

And now, finally, for the ones who speak about freedom of speech and human rights, I have nothing but a few simple questions. Who killed Babar Qadri, the man who stood with the terrorists, the man who advocated for the enemy? The very people whom he supported didn’t think twice before plunging the bullet into his forehead. And if it isn’t blatant enough, that is the irony. Now, moving on to the precious human rights.

The Human Rights that Farooq Abdullah so vigorously defends. But before the Article 370, that Abdullah seeks China’s intervention to restore, was abrogated, where were the human rights, for seven long years, of the Valmiki Samaj? Where were the Human Rights for the children who were deprived of decent education? Where were the rights of women, who, when married outside the state, had no rights on land? Who were prone to domestic violence, since the Act for Protection of Women from Domestic Violence was not applicable? Why were the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act and the Juvenile Justice Act not applicable? Where was the fundamental right, the Right to Education?

Why wasn’t there a political reservation for the scheduled tribes and where did the rights of the forest tribes disappear to? Why were sanitation workers denied citizenship and where did the rights of the scheduled castes go? The 20,000 odd West Pakistani Refugees were denied democratic rights before this vicious act was abrogated. It is thus a humble request to Mr Abdullah that if a fourteen-year-old from the other end of the country knows this much, as a “ground level” parliamentarian, he ought to know the situation the constituencies face and do the needful. Yet, here he is screaming at the top of his lungs regarding Human Rights and begging for the restoration of the very Article 370 that abolished them. Surely, hypocrisy isn’t the right word to describe this.

But despite all this, I think we can bring a change in the way these traitors think. No, it isn’t the method of “warning” them the way the BJP government in Gujarat “warned” the channels who spread fake news. No, it is something much more courageous to tackle this seditious comment. Something we failed to do to Arundhati Roy, who openly sold the Indian passport. We ought to revoke this man’s passport. His citizenship. And strip him off the Indian identity he so often insults and trashes.

Section 10 of The Passport Act of 1967 states, almost identically to the oath this MP took in the parliament, that in the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of India, a passport can be revoked. His oath said the same thing, yet he broke it time and time again. And so, I ask you, why shouldn’t we strip his passport and teach the likes of him a lesson? Why should we give a license to others to speak this kind of nonsense against the country that gives them everything? Cut out the privileges this man receives. For Farooq Abdullah, will not die an Indian.

At the end of the day though, the question falls at the doorstep of our households. Are we ready to be hardliners and condemn those who need to be condemned? Are we ready to uphold the integrity and sovereignty of our motherland? Are we ready to not pay heed of the lip service people will offer while opposing us and instead put our nation first? Are we ready to stand for what is right and prevent these kinds of seditious statements hereby? Because, ladies and gentlemen if we are, then the matter is as simple as can get.  

Conquering the likes of Pakistan and China, showing them the gloomy hands of defeat, that is a daily duty for our armed forces. They will manage and they will uphold our country’s integrity. They will hold our flag high for defeating the enemies outside, it is a piece of cake for them. It is only the enemies and traitors inside our homeland, the modern-day Mir Jafars that it is difficult to wipe out.

But if we are able to rid ourselves of this plaque in the form of these anti-nationalists, then that is victory for us, brothers and sisters. Because for a happy India tomorrow, we need a safe India today.

Jai Hind!

Hijab row the cringe worthy arguments

0

I usually try to avoid using negative titles to my writings and start anything with negativity in general. But recently on this Hijab row I saw a cringe worthy video that made me so sick that I cannot stop myself from being vitriolic. This video in question asks a little girl why do you wear hijab and the little girl is ‘made’ to say: this is your phone and you think it is valuable hence you protect it with a cover right same is with me I am valuable therefore i need to be protected with Hijab. This attempt at objectification of women is deplorable and disgusting, so what is out next analogy you are so sweet so I will wrap you a chocolate wrapper?

Women have faced persecution and paid heavy price of religious customs and tradition over the last few centuries across all religions. Many social reformers and activist over the years have fought these customs and are making every effort even today to bring in the equality. After so many centuries in the last few decades women have started coming out and move around as equals in all spheres of life. Crime and Criminal still exists but overall, the main stream society has come to terms with fact that both son and daughter are same and equal. It will be pity if any political party whichever you belong to now the turn the wheels back and give in to radical elements for short term gains.

Hijab vs Turban vs Tilak vs Cross:

Interesting that a so called erudite and educated MP made this comparison. I will not argue against this with logic but here is an equally radical alternative approach to bring in equality. Women have carried on baton of religious custom for so many centuries, time for men to man up and start doing the same. So just like Sikh boys ask Hindu boys to wear ghunghat and Muslim boys to wear Hijab. We can bring in legislation to change the school uniform to meet these new guidelines across genders and religions. I am equally surprised the this walking dictionary has not learnt the meaning of UNIFORM. When it comes to schools all students irrespective of class , creed, region, religion, rich and poor are same and walk in as equals in front of teachers for seeking knowledge.

Hijab as a religious mandate argument

If our laws and constitutions are made to resemble various religious texts there is no going forward of human being as civilization being. What if tomorrow somebody cites a scripture and suggest that lower caste people cannot sit on my bench at school? What will you do and where will this end? For the sake of humanity stop these regressive morals laws in name of the religious freedom. Use religion as spiritual and moral guidance and not as policing tool

Hijab as a choice

For some women who are supporting this garbage movement as a choice. Please remember women were born equal to men, these arrogant men have over the years have used various means to destroy the spirit of women. First it comes as a choice and then it turns into judgement if you choose not to and judgement soon turns into punishment and men thrive on punishments. Spiritual and progressive thoughts are choices we need to make not regressive and outdated rudimentary practices.

Finally, the political parties using children and schools as means to fight these political battles it shows an intellectual impotency that can be never be remedied. So it is time to do the right thing and put full stop this political non-sense and make common uniform practice across all schools that cannot be compromised in principle.

लताजी से सम्बन्धित कुछ यादगार वाकये

0

आध्यात्मिक गुरू विद्या नरसिम्हा भारती द्वारा ‘स्वर मौली’ की उपाधि से सम्मानित स्वर साम्राज्ञी भारत रत्न लता मंगेशकरजी को अन्तिम विदाई पूरे राजकीय सम्मान के साथ दी गयी। इनके बारे में जितना भी लिखें कम ही पड़ेगा। फिर भी प्रबुद्ध पाठकों से जैसा याद है, कुछ खास वाकये साँझा करना चाहता हूँ। जो इस प्रकार है-

1] भारतीयता व राष्ट्रप्रेम से ओतप्रोत सदैव हँसमुख, दृढ़प्रतिज्ञ लताजी ने 1942 से अभी तक अर्थात सात दशकों से अधिक समय तक हिंदी, मराठी, तमिल, कन्नड़ और बंगाली समेत 36 भारतीय भाषाओं में लगभग 30,000 एकल, युगल या सामूहिक गीत संगीत जगत को दे कर स्वर्गलोक के लिये प्रस्थान किया है।

2] दूरदर्शन पर मोदीजी ने बिल्कुल ठीक ही कहा कि “मेरे जैसे बहुत से लोग गर्व से कहेंगे कि उनका उनके साथ घनिष्ठ संबंध था, आप जहां भी जाते हैं, आप हमेशा उसके प्रियजनों को ढूंढ सकते हैं”। उनकी सुरीली आवाज हमेशा हमारे साथ रहेगी, इसमें लेशमात्र भी सन्देह नहीं।

3] जैसा सर्वविदित है महान गायिका ने वर्ष 2013 में कहा था कि वह मोदीजी को भारत के प्रधानमंत्री के रूप में देखने की ईश्वर से प्रार्थना करती हैं।

4] दृढ़प्रतिज्ञ लताजी ने 50 के दशक में उस समय के सर्वाधिक लोकप्रिय गायक ग़ुलाम मुहम्मद दुर्रानी के व्यवहार के चलते अपमानित महसूस किया। तब बिना समय गँवाये उसी समय संगीतकार नौशाद साहब को स्पष्ट कर दिया की मैं इस शख़्स के साथ गाना नहीं गाऊँगी और उसके बाद उन्होनें जी एम दुर्रानी के साथ कभी भी गाना नहीं गया।

5] लताजी को क्रिकेट खेल से बहुत ज्यादा लगाव था, जो इस तथ्य से विदित होता है जब लताजी ने मीना और उषा के साथ विश्वकप 2011 में पाकिस्तान के खिलाफ अंत के पहिले के मुक़ाबले के दौरान कुछ खाया-पिया नहीं अर्थात उनलोगों ने निर्जल व्रत रखा था ।पूरे खेल के दौरान भारत की जीत के लिए प्रार्थना की और भारत की जीत के बाद ही सभी ने अन्न-जल ग्रहण किया।

6] 1960 के आस-पास इंदौर में एक कार्यक्रम के दौरान एक बार ऊंचा सुर लगाते वक्त लताजी को जब उनके स्वर-रज्जु में किसी परेशानी के चलते अपनी आवाज फटती महसूस हुई तब उन्होंने अपनी इस परेशानी को इंदौर के मशहूर शास्त्रीय गायक उस्ताद अमीर खां से साँझा की। उसके बाद खाँ साहब के सलाह अनुसार उन्होंने मायानगरी मुंबई से कुछ समय तक बाहर रह ‘‘मौनव्रत’’ रखा। और मौनव्रत समाप्ति पश्चात ‘‘बीस साल बाद’’ (1962) का गीत ‘‘कहीं दीप जले, कहीं दिल’ गा कर संगीत की दुनिया में वापसी की। यहाँ यह भी बता दूँ कि इस गीत के लिए उन्हें सर्वश्रेष्ठ पार्श्वगायिका का फिल्मफेयर पुरस्कार भी मिला था।

7] लताजी एक सनातनी धार्मिक महिला थीं। वे कृष्ण भक्त थीं और वे हमेशा ‘श्री कृष्ण’ लिख कर ही लेखन की शुरुवात करतीं थीं। यही कारण रहा कि भजन गाते वक्त उनके आंसू छलक जाते थे।

8] एक साक्षात्कार के दौरान लताजी ने स्वीकार किया कि सीआईडी (CID) श्रृंखला की तो मुझे लत जैसी लग गयी है। मैं इसे 19 साल से जब से यह शुरु हुआ है तब से देखती आ रही हूँ। इस में भाग लेने वाले सभी कलाकार वगैरह हर साल गणपति पूजा के दौरान मेरे घर आते हैं।

9] आजतक के कार्यक्रम ‘सीधी बात’ में लताजी ने बताया था कि राजकपूर संग उनका (रॉयल्टी) मालिकाना अधिकार शुल्क को लेकर झगड़ा हुआ था और कपूर साहब के मना कर देने पर उन्होनें उनके फिल्मों मे न गाने का निर्णय बता दिया। लेकिन दो-एक फिल्म करने का पश्चात वो मेरे पास आए और उन्होंने मुझे (रॉयल्टी) मालिकाना अधिकार शुल्क दिया। उसके बाद फिल्म बॉबी के वक्त आकर उन्होंने मुझे गाने के लिये कहा।

10] लताजी को लंदन के प्रतिष्ठित रॉयल अल्बर्ट हॉल में (लाइव) सीधा प्रसारण प्रस्तुति देने वाली पहली भारतीय कलाकार होने का गौरव प्राप्त है।

उपरोक्त वाकयों के अलावा भी लताजी से जुड़े अनेकों ऐसे ऐसे वाकये हैं जो आपको सुनने, पढ़ने में मिलेंगे जहाँ उनकी शालीनता, विनम्रता की छाप ऐसी है कि बड़े से बड़ा दिग्गज भी उनके सजदे में झुका नजर आये तो अचरज मत करियेगा क्योंकि उन्होनें अपने त्याग, सत्यता, कर्तव्यनिष्ठता, व्यावहारिकता, मिलनसारिता वगैरह वगैरह से एक बहुत बड़ी शख्सियत खड़ी की है। यही कारण है कि हिंदुस्तानी शास्त्रीय संगीत के दिग्गज उस्ताद बड़े गुलाम अली के कानों में रियाज करते समय जब लताजी के गाने के बोल पड़े तब बड़े ध्यान से लता जी का गाना सुन लेने के पश्चात बरबस बोल पड़े-  ‘कमबख्त, कहीं बेसुरी नहीं होती’।

इसी प्रकार पंडित कुमार गंधर्व लिखते हैं- ‘जिस कण या मुरकी को कंठ से निकालने में अन्य गायक-गायिकाएं आकाश-पाताल एक कर देते हैं, उसी कण, मुरकी, तान या लयकारी का सूक्ष्म भेद वह अर्थात लताजी बड़े ही सहज करके फेंक देती हैं’।

अन्त मेँ आप सभी को संगीत जगत में उनके अतुलनीय योगदान को याद कराते हुये उनकी अनन्त यात्रा पर मैं सादर श्रद्धा सुमन अर्पित करता हूँ।

जयंत के सामने रालोद के अस्तित्व को बचाने चुनौती

अजित सिंह को विरासत में मिली थीं करीब 36 सीटें
अजित सिंह को विरासत में अपने पिता से 36 सीटें मिली थी, लेकिन 2019 तक उनके पास अपनी भी सीट नहीं बची हैं। चौधरी परिवार की 1937 से शुरू हुई राजनीति आज केवल नाम की रह गई है। चौधरी चरण सिंह की राजनीति से बनाई गई राष्ट्रीय लोकदल केवल एक पार्टी मात्र बची है। चौधरी चरण सिंह ने जिस लोकदल को इतना मजबूत किया था कि वह प्रधानमंत्री तक बने। वहीं, लोकदल अजित सिंह को विरासत में 1989 में मिली, जब वह अपने पिता की बागपत सीट से भारी मतों से विजयी हुए,अजित सिंह छह बार यहां से सांसद रहे। 2014 में वह तीसरे नंबर पर चले गए थे। 2019 लोकसभा चुनाव में अपने पुत्र जयंत को बागपत सीट सौंपकर अजित सिंह मुज्जफरनगर से लड़ें मगर पिता-पुत्र दोनों की जोड़ी मोदी लहर में हार गयी. कोरोना से पिता अजित सिंह के निधन के बाद रालोद की कमान जयंत के पास हैं, ये विधानसभा चुनाव उसके लिए सबसे बड़ी अग्नि परीक्षा हैं.

पलटी मारने का पुराना इतिहास
गृहमंत्री अमित शाह के उन्हें समाजवादी पार्टी का साथ छोड़कर बीजेपी के साथ आने के ऑफ़र के जवाब में रालोद के अध्यक्ष जयंत चौधरी ने कहा “चवन्नी नहीं हूं जो पलट जऊंगा” लेकिन उनकी पार्टी का इतिहास तो चुनाव के बाद पलटी मारने का रहा है. जयंत के चवन्नी वाले बयान के बाद केंद्रीय शिक्षामंत्री धर्मेद्र प्रधान ने जयंत को ये इतिहास याद भी दिलाया है. उन्होंने ये भी याद दिलाया है कि जिस बीजेपी के नाम से वो नाक भौं सिकोड़ रहे हैं, उसी के साथ गठबंधन के चलते वो 2009 में मथुरा से लोकसभा चुनाव जीतकर संसद पहुंचे थे.

मुसलमानों का भरोसा जीतने की चुनौती

मुसलमानों का भरोसा जीतना जयंत के लिए बेहद ज़रूरी है.अखिलेश ने इसलिए उनके साथ गठबंधन किया है कि वो जाट-मुस्लिम समीकरण से पश्चिमी उत्तर प्रदेश में बीजेपी के विजय रथ को रोकेंगे. ऐसा भी मुमकिन है जब मुसलमानों का बड़ा धड़ा उनके गठबंधन को वोट दे. राजनीतिक जानकारों का मानना है कि मुसलमान सपा-रालोद गठबंधन को तभी वोट देगा, जब जाट इस गठबंधन को एक तरफा वोट करेगा.

बीजेपी के चक्रव्यूह में फंसे जयंत

मुज्जफरनगर दंगो के बाद जाट और मुस्लिमों के बीच पैदा हुई खाई को पाटने के लिए अखिलेश यादव और जयंत की बनाई जाट-मुस्लिम एकता वाली रणनीति को ध्वस्त करने के लिए बीजेपी ने बड़े पमाने पर जाटों को टिकट दिया है. माना जा रहा हैं सपा-रालोद के जाट उम्मीदवार को जाटों का भरपूर वोट मिलेगा, लेकिन मुसलमान उम्मीदवार को जाट उतने उत्साह से वोट ना देकर बीजेपी के जाट प्रत्याशी को जिताएंगे. इसका अहसास जयंत को भी है, इसको भांपते हुए मुज्जफरनगर जनपद में छह में एक सीट पर भी गठबंधन ने मुस्लिम उम्मीदवार को टिकट नहीं दिया है, इससे ज़िले के मुसलमानों में नाराज़गी बताई जा रही है. कृषि कानूनों की वापसी और लगातार उठते हिंदू-मुस्लिम मुद्दों की वजह से जाटों के एक बड़े तबके पर फिर से हिंदुत्व का नारा हावी होने लगा है. मुज्जफरनगर दंगो के जख्म लोगों के जहन में अभी भी जिन्दा हैं, जिसको भर पाना जयंत के लिए बड़ी चुनौती है.

बीजेपी के सामने पुराना प्रदर्शन दोहराने की चुनौती

मुज़फ्फरनगर दंगों से हुए सांप्रदायिक ध्रुवीकरण की वजह से पश्चिमी उत्तर प्रदेश में जाट-मुसलमान समीकरण ध्वस्त हो गए थे. मोदी लहर और हिंदुत्व के मुद्दों पर हुए विधानसभा चुनाव में इस इलाके में बीजेपी का झंडा फहराया था, पहले और दूसरे चरण में जिन 113 सीटों पर चुनाव होना है, उनमें से पिछली बार 91 सीटें बीजेपी ने जीती थीं. पहले चरण वाली 58 में से 53 और दूसरे चरण वाली 55 में से 38 बीजेपी के खाते में गई थीं. रालोद और सपा गठबंधन से बने समीकरणों को ध्वस्त करने के लिए बीजेपी ने इस बार पूरी ताक़त झोक दी है.

सपा रालोद गठबंधन का हव्वा

देश के अधिकांश मीडिया हाउस और कुछ कथाकथित पत्रकारों ने सपा और रालोद गठबंधन के पक्ष में एक नरेटिव बनाया हुआ हैं, जबकि आंकड़े इसके विपरीत हैं. पिछले विधानसभा चुनाव में रालोद ने वेस्ट यूपी में सौ सीटों पर चुनाव लड़ा था,जिसमे 85 सीटों पर पार्टी की जमानत जब्त हुई थी,4 सीटों पर नंबर 2 पर पार्टी रही, तथा 13 सीटों पर नंबर 3 पर रही थी, 32 सीटों में से 6 सीटों पर हजार से कम,4 सीटों पर ढाई हजार से कम, कुल मिलकर 21 सीटों पर दस हजार मतों से नीचे सिमट गयी थी. रालोद ने 277 सीटों पर चुनाव लड़कर सिर्फ छपरौली की सीट ही जीती थी. रालोद को कुल पड़े वोटों का सिर्फ 1.87% यानि 15,45,811 वोट मिले थे. इस वजह से रालोद की क्षेत्रीय पार्टी की भी मान्यता रद्द हो गई थी. क्षेत्रीय पार्टी की मान्यता बरकरार रखने के रालोद का विधानसभा सीटों की 3%  सीटें यानि कम से कम 13 सीटें या फिर कोई भी सीट जीते बगैर 8%  वोट हासिल करना जरूरी है. अपनी पार्टी की मान्यता बचाने के लिए वो गठबंधन में सिर्फ 36 सीटों पर लड़ने को राज़ी हुए हैं. क्या सपा और रालोद के गठबंधन बीजेपी को अपना पुराना प्रदर्शन दोहराने से रोक पाती हैं ये तो 10 मार्च को चुनाव परिणाम के बाद ही पता चल पायेगा

-अभिषेक कुमार

जय श्री राम के नारे के बदले अल्‍लाह हू अकबर का नारा लगाने वाली छात्रा को जमीयत उलेमा-ए-हिंद देगा 5 लाख का इनाम

0

कर्नाटक हिजाब विवाद तुल पकड़ता ही जा रहा है। जय श्री राम का नारा लगा रहे लड़कों के सामने अल्‍लाह हू अकबर का नारा लगाने वाली लड़की को जमीयत उलेमा-ए-हिंद ने 5 लाख रुपए इनाम की घोषणा थी। 

बेंगलुरु: कर्नाटक हिजाब विवाद ने अब राजनीतिक रंग ले लिया है। सोशल मीडिया पर वायरल हुए एक वीडियो में जय श्री राम का नारा लगा रहे लड़कों के सामने अल्‍लाह हू अकबर का नारा लगाने वाली लड़की के समर्थन में उतरने वालों की संख्या बढ़ती जा रही है। आईएमआईएम चीफ हैदराबाद से सांसद असदुद्दीन ओवैसी के बाद जमीयत उलेमा-ए-हिंद के अध्यक्ष हजरत मौलाना महमूद असद मदनी ने समर्थन करते हुए 5 लाख रुपए इनाम की घोषणा थी। 

उसके समर्थन में पोस्टर जारी कर लिखा गया कि अपने संवैधानिक और धार्मिक अधिकारों के लिए विरोध की तेज हवा के सामने डटकर पूरे हौसले से मुकाबला करने वाली पीईएस कॉलेज मांड्या की बहादुर छात्रा बीबी मुस्कान खान, पुत्री मुहम्मद हुसैन खान को जमीयत उलेमा-ए-हिंद के अध्यक्ष हजरत मौलाना महमूद असद मदनी जी की हार्दिक बधाई एवं उज्जवल भविष्य के लिए शुभकामनाएं। जमीयत उलेमा-ए-हिंद ने इस बहादुर बेटी की हौसलाअफ्जाई के लिए 5 लाख रुपए के नकद इनाम की घोषणा की है।

Journalist Tushar Rastogi

Yoga philosophy – The past, present and future

0

By definition, Yoga philosophy is a branch of Hindu philosophy that deals with the understanding of life and the universe. Yoga philosophy is a combination of two Sanskrit words, ‘yuj’ and ‘aasana’. Yuj means to connect or to join together, while asana means posture.

Yoga philosophy beyond definition 

Yoga philosophy was created by Patanjali, who lived between 200 BC and 400 BC. He was a Hindu philosopher who lived in India about 2000 years ago. He wrote an extensive treatise on yoga called the Yoga Sutras. In fact, this book is still used today as a guide to living an ethical life, 

Yoga philosophy is not just confined to India, it is practiced all over the world and has become more popular than ever before, with millions of people practicing it every day. 

When we talk about some of the oldest yoga institutes, following the authentic yoga philosophy, Kaivalyadhama is a name that falls in the top list. Established in 1924, Kaivalyadhama which is located in the western region of India was set up with the distinct purpose of merging yoga tradition with science, to make this knowledge relevant and accessible to the world.

Adaptations of yoga philosophy in today’s time 

In today’s era, it is very important that we adapt Yoga philosophy & practice it without losing its essence. Many a time, yoga is trivialized into a set of materialistic practices that is based only on the physical body. For reference, the new-gen practices include skipping Savasana, getting diverted by phones, challenging yourself to be better than others, not following basic yoga rules, etc.

Well, you need not push yourself to Yoga, instead adjust yourself to get camouflaged with the traits of yoga. 

Of course, that does not mean to do things out of your comfort zone. Yoga gives you the flexibility to adapt or modify postures and asanas according to your ease. You always have the leverage to accept yoga as per your body without affecting the fundamental principles of yoga. That’s the beauty of Yoga!

Cultivate abundance in your mind, heart & life through yoga

Yoga and personal development are inseparable. When we zone in and cultivate abundance on the mat, it’s not just our physical body that benefits. Abundance flows from your mind to your heart and into every cell of your body.

Abundance according to yoga philosophy

Materialistic things in life should never set your abundance boundaries. abundance is related to freedom, a heart full of gratitude, knowledge, and everything that defines your inner beauty. This is possible by acknowledging yoga philosophy in its truest sense. When you accept yoga wholeheartedly, you will feel the mindset shift as you start to clear the mental debris through asanas and pranayama that are so simple yet so effective. It will guide you on the path of spirituality and success leading to the realization of a higher Self. 

“When you realize there is nothing lacking, the whole world belongs to you.”

– Lao Tzu

Yoga for diseases is a healer in many ways

Yoga has been mostly known as a form of exercise, but nowadays it has evolved into a range of practices with medicinal benefits. Studies have shown that it can be a powerful healing tool, resulting in reduced stress and anxiety, improved physical and mental health and it can even lead to better sleep at night. 

One of the most surprising benefits is the fact that yoga can be used as an unexpected treatment for mood disorders like bipolar disorder or schizophrenia. It has also been used amply to heal some disease conditions effectively like Chronic musculoskeletal pain, PTSD, Insomnia, Hypertension, Nervousness, Depression, Diabetes and works best for heart patients.

Best yoga institutes offers varied courses to overcome your body challenges as every course is designed and customized according to the individual. Below are few of the many courses:

  • Yoga for pain management
  • Yoga for weight management
  • Yoga for Auto Immune
  • Intensive Yoga / Advance Yoga
  • Covid recovery program
  • Yoga for Healing
  • Yoga for Relaxation

Now, physiologists are beginning to understand the science behind biomechanical changes in the body during yoga poses and the ways yoga can be effectively used to treat chronic illness. A little knowledge goes a long way, and it’s never too late to change your life for the better. Apprehend what yoga philosophy offers and indulge in holistic healing.

कर्नाटक हिजाब विवाद क्यों है संविधान को धमकी! धर्मनिरपेक्ष देश में कट्टर इस्लामिक आजादी की चाहत?

0

कर्नाटक के कुछ कालेजों में हिजाब पहनकर ही क्लास करने पर अड़ी कुछ मुस्लिम लड़कियों को क्लास करने से मना किया जा रहा है। एक कॉलेज प्रशासन का कहना है की वो इनके हिजाब पहनकर आने के खिलाफ नही है और ये लड़कियां स्कूल कैंपस में भी हिजाब पहनकर घूम सकती है लेकिन क्लास के दौरान उनको अपना हिजाब उतारना होगा।

लेकिन लड़कियों का कहना है कि चाहे कुछ हो जाए वो हिजाब नही उतारेगी क्योंकि क्लास में मर्द अध्यापक पढ़ाएंगे और उनको अपने शौहर के सिवा अन्य किसी मर्द के सामने बिना हिजाब के जाने से इस्लाम मना करता है। अब जब स्कूल ने मना कर दिया तो ये लोग विरोध प्रदर्शन कर रही हैं, उनका कहना है कि हिजाब पहन कर क्लास करना उनका संवैधानिक हक है और हिजाब पहने हुए क्लास करने से रोकना उनके संवैधानिक अधिकारों का हनन है।

इसके लिए उन लोगो ने कर्नाटक हाई कोर्ट ने एक याचिका भी दायर कर रखी है।

कालेज प्रशासन का कहना है कि कॉलेज का अपना एक ड्रेस कोड है और वो बिना किसी धार्मिक भेदभाव के सबके ऊपर लागू होता है और उसको सभी बच्चो को मानना पड़ेगा चाहे वो जिस धर्म के हो और जब सभी धर्म के बच्चे इसको मानते हैं तो मुस्लिम लड़कियां क्यों विशेषाधिकार चाहतीं हैं? उनका कहना है कि कॉलेज में किसी भी प्रकार के धार्मिक पहनावे के साथ आने की परमिशन किसी को नही होगी।

ताज्जुब होता है इस हद तक की हठ_धार्मिकता पर, वो भी पढ़े लिखे लोगो की और एक धर्मनिरपेक्ष देश में!

जहां दुनिया के कई इस्लाम शासित देशों में मुस्लिम महिलाए हिजाब और बुर्का आदि के खिलाफ जिंदगी और मौत की जंग लड़ रही हैं, जहां उनको बुर्का, हिजाब न पहनने पर बुरी तरह से मारा–पीटा, घसीटा जा रहा है, फिर भी अपनी जिंदगियों को दांव पर लगाकर महिलाएं इस लड़ाई को लड़ रही हैं, वो इस काले कपड़े से आजादी चाहती हैं, किसी भी कीमत पर!

वहीं दूसरी तरफ भारत, जहां ये सारी आजादी मुफ्त में जन्मजात मिल जाती है, वहां की पढ़ी लिखी मुस्लिम लड़कियां बुरके में कैद होने होने के लिए अपनी पढ़ाई–लिखाई, करियर सब कुछ दांव पर लगाने को तैयार है। ये कितने अफसोस की बात है कि ये लोग 1400 साल पुराने घोर पितृसत्तात्मक नियमों से बंधी रहना चाहती हैं।

उससे भी बड़े अफसोस की बात है कि कुछ लोग बस राजनीतिक लाभ की आशा में इस हठधर्मिता को समर्थन दे रहे हैं, जैसे 1986 में तीन तलाक जैसे घोर महिला विरोधी नियम को कानूनी अमलीजामा पहनाकर इनलोगो ने किया, और मुस्लिम महिलाओं को उनके पतियों के रहमो करम पर छोड़ दिया गया।

जिसकी वजह से देश ने एक ऐसी सांप्रदायिक राजनीति के दौर में प्रवेश किया जिससे आज तक नहीं निकल पाया है। ये एकदम सही है कि संविधान में सबको अपने धर्म को मानने की, प्रैक्टिस करने की आजादी है लेकिन अपने धर्म को सार्वजनिक जगहों पर थोपने की आजादी किसी को नही है और ये बात सभी को बेहद स्पष्ट होनी चाहिए।

और फिर जहां पर किसी के व्यक्तिगत धार्मिकता का टकराव सार्वजनिक नियम कानूनों से हो वहां पर सार्वजनिक नियमों को ही वरीयता दी जानी चाहिए वो भी बिना लाग लपेट के, तभी इस बहू पारंपरिक देश में एकता रह पाएगी।

प्रत्येक उस अतार्किक जिद का विरोध होना चाहिए जो सार्वजनिक व्यवस्था और शांति में खलल डालती हो फिर चाहे वो लगातार सड़क पर नमाज पढ़ने की जिद हो,
या फिर मैं हिजाब उतारूंगी ही नही वाली जिद। किसी के घूंघट नही हटाउंगी की जिद होने पर भी यहीं लागू होगा!

आखिर लोग अपने घरों/मंदिरो में घंटो पूजा पाठ करते है लेकिन अगर किसी सार्वजनिक वेटिंग हाल में यही करने लगे तो क्या ये स्वीकार्य होगा? और सबसे बड़ी बात क्या इसको स्वीकार्य होना चाहिए?

बिलकुल नहीं!

कुछ साल पहले की एक घटना याद आती है उमैया खान नाम की एक लड़की नेट की परीक्षा देने गई थी, काफी मेधावी छात्रा थी। सेंटर पर नकल रोकने हेतु सभी लड़कियों से उनके स्कार्फ/दुपट्टे/हिजाब/गहने आदि उतरवा कर ही परीक्षा कक्ष में प्रवेश दिया जा रहा था। उमैया ने हिजाब उतारने से मना कर दिया बोली मैं इस नियम को नही मानूंगी। मै हिजाब नहीं उतारूंगी उसको बताया गया कि अगर उन्होंने नियम नहीं माना तो परीक्षा कक्ष में प्रवेश नही दिया जाएगा लेकिन वो नही मानी।

उसने अपनी एक साल की पढ़ाई, सारी तैयारी को जाया जाने दिया बस इसलिए की उसको एक सामान्य प्रशासनिक नियम के तहत दो घंटे के लिए हिजाब उतारना था।
आखिर उसने परीक्षा छोड़ दी, उसके साथ की बहुत सारी अन्य मुस्लिम लड़कियों ने भी परीक्षा दी, उन्होंने हिजाब उतार दिये और करियर को प्राथमिकता दी। क्वालीफाई भी किया और आज रिसर्च कर रही होगी लेकिन उनकी तारीफ किसी ने नहीं की।…..कि इन लड़कियों ने वैज्ञानिक सोच का परिचय दिया है। तारीफ करी गई उमैया की कई हस्तियों द्वारा…. जबकि इस हठ धार्मिकता के लिए उसकी आलोचना की जानी चाहिए थी। लेकिन उसको मुस्लिम लड़कियों के लिए आदर्श बताया गया।

अब ये मुस्लिम लड़कियां सोचें कि ऐसा कहने वाले लोग उनको ज्यादा पढ़ा लिखा बनाना चाहते हैं या ज्यादा धार्मिक? आखिर स्कूल/कॉलेज आदि में धार्मिकता के ऐसे हठ भरे प्रदर्शन की क्या अनिवार्यता है? हिजाब को अपने अस्तित्व की लड़ाई वो भी एक सेकुलर देश में बना लेना कौन सी बुद्धिमानी वाली बात है? आखिरकार इससे अव्यवस्था ही तो फैल रही है?

अब सुनने में आ रहा है कि प्रतिक्रिया स्वरूप हिंदू लड़के/लड़किया भी भगवा गमछा/शाल लेकर स्कूल में आने लगे हैं! जैसे गुड़गांव में सड़क पर नमाज पढ़ने के विरुद्ध बहुत सारे लोग सड़क पर ही पूजा पाठ करने लगे थे!

मेरा मानना है कि इस तरह की हठधार्मिकताये अनेक सामाजिक समस्याएं पैदा करके सामाजिक अलगाव को ही जन्म देंगी।

इसलिए बेहतर होगा कि हम अपने धर्म /आस्था/मजहब को अपने घरों/धर्मस्थलों तक ही सीमित रखें उनको सार्वजनिक रूप से थोपने की कोशिश कभी न करे, खासकर तब जब उससे सार्वजनिक व्यवस्था में अड़चन उत्पन्न हो (धार्मिक पर्व/त्योहार आदि अपवाद हो सकते है)।

एक धर्म के अनुयाई के रूप में हम अलग हो सकते है, लेकिन एक भारतीय के रूप में हमको एक होना चाहिए तभी जाकर देश में एक स्वस्थ सामाजिक एकता स्थापित हो पाएगी!

हम सभी को देश के कानूनों को धार्मिक कानूनों पर हमेशा प्राथनिकता देनी चाहिए!

Ancient judicial wisdom for modern Bharat

0

When Chief Justice of India Shri Ramana appealed for the Indianisation of the judiciary, the country ushered in a new dawn of renaissance. The meaning of the Indianisation of the judiciary, as explained by Justice Ramana, is to be more and more conscious of the existing realities in the country in order to provide greater access to justice for the poor. In addition to CJI’s views, Supreme Court Justice, Shri. Abdul Nazeer, has gone a step further and expressed the need to dethrone the colonial legal system and replace it with the great tradition of Manu, Kautilya, Katyayana, Brihaspati, Narada, Parashara, Yajnavalkya, and other legal luminaries of ancient India.

A philosophical churning that kicked off after 2014 has inevitably touched a chord with the judiciary also, which is a very welcome and proud movement for the nation. Our dream is big, therefore a starting point could be the replacement of tools of interpretation with indigenous sources. It is not the case that our judiciary has not employed it before, nor have our scholars neglected this requirement altogether. However, the push from judicial brethren is somewhat lacking in this entire mission, and that has dealt a setback to such fundamental reform in the judiciary. Frequent quotes from foreign sources to arrive at justice by the legal fraternity has resulted in our ancient scholars being settled as tailenders. The very first move towards the Indianisation of the judiciary is to bounce back to our classical sagacity as the source of first order. Overreliance on foreign underpinnings to interpret laws is an attempt to fit a square peg into a round hole, which results in more harm than benefit to the people and disturbs civilizational postulates.

Ancient Bharat had achieved advancement in legal science equal to that in other arenas of knowledge. However, the annexation of Bharat by the British unleashed an ugly suppression of highly sophisticated knowledge of this land and its replacement by western knowledge. We had encompassing schools of thought in the law, such as Vijnaneshwara (author of Mitakshara), Jimutvahana (author of Dayabhag), Nanda Pandit (author of Dattak Mimansa), etc. The “Mimansa or Purva Mimansa” rules laid down by the sage Jaimini were used to establish harmony in the situation of conflict among these schools. “Mimansa”, though having cutting-edge rules in contemporary terms, they have been superimposed by the works of western jurists like Maxwel or Craies, and very infrequently, the Supreme Court of India has invoked “Mimansa” as an instrument of interpretation. The Constitution of India under Article 141 enjoins all courts to follow the law declared by the Supreme Court. Hence, the frequent use of Mimansa rules in the Supreme Court of India would encourage the subordinate judiciary to hark back to our traditional science of law.

Some peculiar differences between foreign jurisprudence and Bharatiya legal traditions are irreconcilable for e.g. duties are superior to rights in India which is called “Dharma” as against the superiority of rights over the duties in western philosophy. Supreme Court of India has also rendered precedence to rights over duties but this approach is causing an imbalance as the state is compelled to strive for the welfare of the people without corresponding responsibility on citizens to reciprocate the efforts of the state. Bharat has witnessed periodic episodes of vandalization of public property for personal interests, and most of the time miscreants get away with impunity. The second instance is that of corruption. Law proscribes bribe giving or bribe-taking, but we rarely see the conviction or even prosecution of bribe givers. If there is fine balance of duties as envisaged in Indian legal tenets neither the state nor would subject overpower another party. Today, many of the difficulties are arising due the assertion of rights by the state as well as citizens which results into conflict rather than solutions. A society where duties are duly followed by each member leads to the minimization of conflicts, law and order issues.

Marriage and family, plankton of Bharatiya society, are dying at a breakneck pace as a result of the implantation of western ideas about rights versus duties, with each family member concerned about his/her own rights while conveniently ignoring duties to cement family bonding.

Interpretation of law and social values of the nation go in tandem and inseparable therefore it becomes a duty of the judge to interpret the law in the context of social values otherwise justice may not be done. Bijoe Emmanuel V State of Kerala alternatively known as the Jehovah’s witnesses case, is such an instance where the Supreme Court borrowed interpretation from colonial countries about the religious concepts of Jehovah’s witnesses and how civil liberty is granted to them in those countries. However, court failed to take into consideration the social make-up of Bharat, which is in contrast to these other colonised nations where Christianity is the principal religion and Greek-Roman is a dominant culture. 

While granting the children a right to silence for refusing to sing the national anthem, the Supreme Court identified gaps in the Indian Constitution and statutes. This was not expected, inasmuch as bolstering nationhood is an evolutionary process fortified by the compulsory singing of the national anthem. Law allows the right to silence but equally entitles court to draw adverse inference but surprisingly, the same principle is not applied in the case when school authorities expelled non-compliant children from the school for the disrespect towards the national anthem due to their refusal to sing it. The national anthem is avowedly a milestone in the integration of the nation and yielding to demand for the right to silence in such instances would invite further exhortations.

The Atidesha principle of Mimansa would have ceased necessary debate on this issue. A principle allows a court to fill the gaps when the law is silent or ambiguous. Jaimini in Sutra 6: 3: 9 states: “When there is a conflict between the purpose and the material, the purpose is to prevail, because in the absence of the prescribed material a substitute can be used, for the material is subordinate to the purpose”.  The purpose of the national anthem is to develop patriotic feelings among the citizens, more emphasis on material defeats a purpose, and Jehovah’s Witnesses case is a suitable example of it.

The incantation of Khalistan Zindabad does not attract sedition under 124 A of the Indian Penal Code if it does not evoke any response or reaction from the public as per the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Balwant Singh & Another V State of Punjab. The reason given by the court was that it  “appears to us that the raising some slogan only a couple of times by the two lonesome appellants, which neither evoked any response nor any reaction from anyone in the public can neither attract the provisions of Section 124A or Section 153A IPC” but Parashara Smriti guides us that “As a drop of oil spreads over the water, — so is sin transmitted from one person to another, by reason of sitting, sleeping, travelling, talking, and eating together with a sinner”.

What could have been the motive behind praising Khalistan other than to challenge the integrity, unity, and sovereignty of Bharat? Whether that evokes a response from the people or not is a subordinate idea. Here comes the Gunapradhan Axiom of the Badha Principle of Mimansa interpretation, which mandates: “If a word or sentence purporting to express a subordinate idea clashes with the principal idea, the former must be adjusted to the latter or must be disregarded altogether.” In the parliamentary democracy, passive supporters of breaking India forces can inflict tremendous damage if they spread their word and consolidate vote bank around their thought, but looking at liberty and freedom from a western frame would obligate judges to expect unrealistic latitude from the state for the miscreants in society.

A reference to the Sanskrit literature on the law would encourage judges to study the socio-cultural setup of our country, without which the interpretation of statutes is a futile exercise. Legal precepts typically explain what is prohibited, but Dharmashastras also prescribe norms, and Mimansa rules reconcile conflicting understandings of laws and norms. Today, few subjects are considered outside the scope of the law and people are given the freedom to practice immorality under the right to privacy, but the Bhagavad Gita explains in Chapter 2 verses 62 & 63 that the roots of such immoral freedom end up in the offense.

One develops an attachment to the objects of the senses while contemplating them. Attachment leads to desire, and from desire arises anger. Anger leads to a clouding of judgment, which results in bewilderment of memory. When memory is bewildered, the intellect gets destroyed; and when the intellect is destroyed, one is ruined.

The courts, time and again, urge the state to enact and enforce potent laws, but without active support by the courts, nothing is possible for the state. Due to legal jargon, the state is reluctant to enact a law along the same lines when the earlier section or act is struck down by the court. A conflict seems to be the frame of reference towards the laws and constitution. However, unless Bharatiya legal literature is sufficiently explored, the conflict is unavoidable. Extrapolation of law by learning the civilizational roots and solutions readily available in our Dharmashastras is a holy grail for the faster resolution of disputes. It is up to the Supreme Court as to when to swing in that direction.

Re-establishing Subhash Babu

0

The Rise

Subhash Chandra Bose was one of the most famous freedom fighters. He was a national leader. Clement Attlee confessed in the British parliament that the popularity of Subhash Chandra Bose and his Azad Hind Fauj was one of the primary reasons behind their departure from India. Subash Chandra Bose qualified Indian Civil Service Exam (ICS), the most challenging exam of that time. Qualifying ICS ensured a handsome salary with a reputed position in the government and society. However, rather than going for civil services and serving Britishers, he preferred to serve the nation. The Indian National Congress (INC) was regarded as a torchbearer for the country’s independence. Therefore, he joined INC to accomplish his goal of fighting against the Britishers. Soon after joining INC, he became President of the All India Youth Congress. He also served as secretary of the Bengal State Congress, CEO of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation, Mayor of Calcutta, and rose to the position of General Secretary and then National President of Indian National Congress. Subhash Babu also worked as an editor for C.R. Das’s newspaper named Forward. Later, he launched his own newspaper called ‘Swaraj’ and authored many books. He was a great leader who gave the famous slogan ‘Jai Hind.’ His ability to lead earned him the title ‘Neta Ji

The Fear

Subhash Chandra Bose was a leader of limitless capabilities. The Britishers feared him the most; they knew he was not like the other congress members. His meeting with Benito Mussolini in Europe gave them nightmares. Neta Ji organised the Volunteer Corps with a complete military uniform and became its General Officer Commanding (GOC), which turned into a center point of discussion in the British press. Besides this, his close connections with Veer Savarkar were also a concern. Bose met Savarkar in Bombay to discuss the possibilities of cooperation between Hindu Mahasabha and Forward Bloc. Savarkar advised Subhash Babu to seek support from axis power and raise an army from the prisoners of war. Soon, it became a piece of news when the Times of India published an article about their meeting. This made Britishers keep a close watch on Subhash Babu. He was under surveillance for several days until he escaped to Germany through Afghanistan.

Not only did Britishers fear him, but a faction of Congress leaders were also afraid of his growing popularity. Bose was elected as president of INC in 1938. The situation became more serious when he got re-elected as president after defeating Gandhi Ji’s candidate in 1939. It was not the defeat of Pattabhi Sitaramayya, whom Gandhi Ji fielded against Subhash Babu, but was a defeat of Gandhi himself. Somewhere remotely, Gandhi was afraid of the growing popularity of Subash Babu and knew that he might lose control over Congress if Subhash Babu continued. Gandhi Ji enjoyed a commanding role in Congress, taking advantage of which he forced Subhash Babu to resign. After resigning from Congress, Neta Ji founded Forward Bloc. In answer to an American journalist, the paranoid Nehru said, “Subhas Bose formed the Forward Bloc to attack the Congress.”

Although Subhash Chandra Bose and Jawaharlal Nehru worked together for years, Bose gained more popularity than Nehru did. Subash Babu expected support from Nehru against the old guard. However, no help came in. The declassified file from the Shah Nawaz Committee shows the nephew of Subhash Babu, Dwijendra Nath Bose, claiming that Nehru “betrayed Netaji after having promised to help him after Netaji had resigned from the Congress Presidentship in 1939.” Nehru used to look at himself as a successor of Gandhi. There were already many differences between Gandhi and Bose for several reasons. Nehru never wanted to displease Gandhi. He started looking at Bose as a political rival. In 1939, Subhash Babu wrote to his nephew Amiya Nath Bose, “Nobody has done more harm to me than Jawaharlal Nehru.” No wonder what made him say that. Nehru was so afraid of Neta Ji that his family was kept under surveillance for almost two decades, even after his death. Maybe because he never believed in Subhash Babu’s death or knew that Neta Ji was alive and might come back to challenge him in the elections.

The Suppression

Bose propagated Purna Swaraj and the use of force to attain it, which was against Gandhi Ji’s theory of non-violence. Therefore, Mahatma Gandhi never paid attention to his words; no matter how bright and viable his ideas were, they were always suppressed. Subhash Babu called Gandhi “Father of the Nation” even though Gandhi shunted him out of Congress. On the contrary, Mahatma Gandhi called Bose a misguided patriot. Jawaharlal Nehru continued in a similar vein. In his testimony before the Shah Nawaz Committee, Dwijendra claimed that, for Nehru, Bose was misguided, misled, and wrong in his methods. Bose was always portrayed as a fascist only because he sought support from axis power and had different plans for the country’s independence. On fetching the help from axis power, Nehru was heard saying at a press conference in 1942 that “It is a slave’s sentiment, a slave’s way of thinking to imagine that to get rid of one person who is dominating us we can expect another person to help us and not dominate later. Free man ought not to think that way.” In other words, was he referring to Subhash Babu as a slave of the axis power?

The facts about Subhash Babu were consistently suppressed during the Nehruvian era. In fact, during the complete Congress era. Nehru government received several requests to declassify files of Neta Ji, but they were all rejected. Apart from hiding information, the Congress regime even destroyed several files pertaining to Subhash Babu. Chandra Kumar Bose, the grand nephew of Subhash Babu, made some serious revelations in this regard. He claimed that in 1999, Mukherjee Commission came across a few documents that revealed Indira Gandhi’s role in destroying four critical files of Neta Ji in 1972. What was there in those files? Why were they destroyed? Nobody knows, but definitely, there was something that was not good for Congress. Indira Gandhi decided not to bring Neta Ji’s mortal remains back to India from Japan. She also refused the help offered by Japan in 1967 to probe into the disappearance of Neta Ji. Thousand of Azad Hind Fauj soldiers got martyred, fighting Britishers in different parts of the country. However, no place was given to them in history books. Several requests of Subhash Babu’s relatives were also turned down. It is evident that in the last 70 years, the successive Congress regimes have deliberately suppressed and destroyed files on Netaji.

The Re-Establishment

Every government refused to declassify the files of Subhas Babu until 2014, when the Modi government scrapped the law and ordered to make them public. In 2015, the Modi government announced the declassification of Neta Ji’s files. One hundred files were already made public in January 2016; the remaining files came into the public domain by September end same year. In 2019 Prime Minister Modi inaugurated the Subhash Chandra Bose museum at Red Fort and instituted ‘Subhash Chandra Bose Aapda Prabandhan Puraskar,’ the annual award in disaster management. Further, Prime Minister inaugurated the memorial dedicated to Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose in Andaman and Nicobar Islands and started Republic Day celebrations one day early. From renaming the three islands in the Andaman and Nicobar archipelago,  residential hostels, and schools after Subhash Babu to declaring 23 January as Parakaram Diwas, the day of Valor, the present government took every possible action to re-establish the Subhash Babu.

Along with the central government, the BJP ruled states also took necessary steps to establish Subhash Babu. Karnataka government celebrated Parakaram Diwas in all schools and colleges across the state. Harayana Government named a park after Subhash Babu, displaying his life story. The Madhya Pradesh government opened a museum in Jabalpur prison dedicated to Neta Ji. Apart from BJP, the other sister organisations of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) are also committed to re-establish Neta Ji. Bhartiya Shikshan Mandal (BSM), the organisation that works in the education field, has dedicated one full year to Subhash Babu. Events like painting competitions, quizzes, essays, debates on Subash Babu will be organised the whole year. It seems that the entire country is working to re-establish Subhash Babu.

The Republic Day Parade’s (CPWD) tableau depicted Subhash Babu and the Indian National Army warriors. A web series has already been launched on Neta Ji. A biography of Subhash Babu is yet to be launched. Publishers are thinking of reprinting books on Subhash Babu. Celebrities who used to distance themselves from speaking about freedom fighters have started wishing the country on their birth anniversaries. Subhash Babu is being re-established. Who will be the next?