Raasta

dhalti gayi jindagi

Karwa banta gaya

chalte rahe kadam

marhawa kahta raha

nikle the tum akele

koi na tere saath tha

per tum pather dil the

jeet ka tumko ehsaas tha

kya kya kurbaniya di

kitne apne begane hue

raste jo kal tak apne the

aaj kaise anjane hue

tarakki ki chahat me

Ai dost itni door na nikal jana

chuut jaye kahi apne

lagne lage sara jahan begana

Sun k ye baat jab dekha maine mud k

tej ho gayi dhadkane

Dimag laga bolne udd udd k

bade ho gaye tum kamaye khub paise

per kya yahi jindagi hai chaha tha tumne jaise.............

Independence day Celebration

well, right after two days we are going to celebrate 15th august .not very important for all over the world but still its essential and breathtaking movement for every indian who is proud to be the part of the land.if a person reaches 60 years of age, he is labeled as an "Old Crippled". One can construe the picture of a man who is bed-ridden, invalid and too old to respond to any kind of treatment. He just lay aside, cherishing its blooming youthful days or he employs his time by playing with his grandchildren, but now the things have changed.I would like to expalain you a story about a country which is 60 years old and still very young, vivacious, highly engertic and is working enthusiastically towards its betterment.most of the world know it as the country which is containg more than versatility in the terms of religions in the terms of faiths in the terms of languages in the terms of skin as well as in the terms of breath.dont be amazed this is the country which has been always known for accepting all those who came from outside and wanted to take its shelter. It is "OUR COUNTRY INDIA". We never know how time sweeps. India was free from the clutches of Britshers in 1947. We still remember those stalwarts who sacrificed their lives to free us from Britisher's cage enabling us to fly freely, independently in the air. Now, for a change I will not again repeat the history of how India got is Independence. We all know and have studied umpteen numbers of times about it in our History books. We studied what all "Our Father of the Nation"- "Mahatma Gandhi" did, we all our aware of the Jallianwala Bagh tragedy and etc.We all normally says that Britshers ruled our country - they exploited us . But what they have given us is UNITY.Most of the people find shame to accept this fact,but it is the fact before the british rule our country was divided into so many parts.these are the british who united our country, we remained united till there time only, What happened after that ? - In Most of the families the two brothers are at daggers drawn with each other. Every one under the sun has become self-centered. After all who has the time to think about the welfare, prosperity of our nation ? Who is dutiful ? - No this is not what I am saying but what I heard in RANG DE BASANTI. Besides, this they have provided Tea - Coffee Gardens, and had given us the language ENGLISH which has now become a foreign inlingua. Aren't we people including me also is ashamed of speaking Hindi in public places or else people who don't know English are being labeled as an ILLITERATE people.As per residing in software industry I still can feel how people are counted as backward if they try to talk in hindi.It is the matter of assame when some bosy is trying to talk about its religion about its religious books etc.people now a days are not aware of the glorious history of the nation ,they also dont know the importance and glory of Hindi.but somehow it should also be accepted Somehow the english is now a necessity and we are responsible to make it high.the boundary is just not consumed towards 28 states but now the thinking level is spreaded globally. what is wrong in that, I completely agree to this that Yes, English is our mother tongue. Why? Don't you want to grab a job in multinational Company? How will we clear the interview? How will we become great personalities? We all should avail this opportunity in our 60 years of Independence to express our heartfelt gratitude towards them for giving this foreign language.We all curse Britshers, but become eagerly excited, over-enthusiastic when we get an opportunity to go abroad, like to the Big Apple. After who wants to stay in a Country endowed with unemployment, extreme poverty , filthiness, corruption , dowry deaths and all other social evils, but remember the case of Kiranjit Walia - who beared the virulent atrocities of her husband for 10 years , no not in a diminutive village but in a country like London.who is culprit for this .this type of case is happening in country like England which is most eagerly known for its prosperity and higher technological bases. Eventually was free and London people persistently protested against the government to release her, Even Goerge Bush wife awared her as She emanated valourness, courageousness. Her dauntless act to rescue herself was truly remarkable. She won Kudos, praises etc. But what if the same thing would have happenend in India? Remember that case of a girl who was just about to get married, her in-laws demanded dowry on the verge, As She was unbearable to see the sight of how her father was accousting, Her doughty act of calling cops just after few hours when she was about to tie the nuptial knot had labeled her as the most astonishingly talented women.In my family too people usually says This is my right to take the dowry why because I have also given the dowry for my daughter or my sister.you tell me just one thing If every body will start to think like this will this process can ever be deleted from the system?if your doughter or your sister is burnt for the money will you also burn ur wife for the sake of this viracious money? Yes India has done progess but still a the disease of discrimination between male and female still exits. After 60 years, India has got its women president Ms.Pratibha Devi Patik. Now we all assess her rule, her power what changes she will going to make instead of saying what has to be done , we all seriously hope that she will says what we have done ?What makes a country good and great? - It is the people, their power of knowledge, caliber, and perseverance. Their highly intellectual minds, Decisiveness, their open and above board dealings with others. A country is empty if there are no people. We the people form our Government, We the people rule not our lives but the whole life of our stupendous country. We the people makes or mars the present, future of our country. We the people mould , shape our country in whatever manner we want to. Like, a one person cannot contribute significantly towards the prosperity, success of the country in the same manner it is not in the hands of one person to change it. It is the collective responsibility of all and sundry to make a gloriously bright, radiant future and to be linked together in its weal and woe. We all know that it sounds the same and hackneyed but as a matter of fact this is the only transparent and solid truth. It is we the people only who back-bite and says bitchy things about our country, thus this is the major reason why our country is lacking far behind and is deprived of numerous facilities as compared to others. We all should become at home in this fact.As our Country has attained its 60 years of Independence and the prime ministers starting from Jawaharlal Nehru to Dr.Mannohan Singh speechifyies about the developments that they will do in the fields of agriculture, industry, infrastructure, education etc and the various measures implemented towards the economic growth of our country. To start, first I am dying to see that lucky day when, I don't which prime minister will say and point out the developments made in these sectors. That their longevity of speech should not reflect about the planned tasks but about the accomplished tasks - that will be the biggest achievement of our country. Quite bummed, that so far no one has said so.

Gandhism ::The Power

Sometimes I like to make an argument on fresh issues related with MahatmaGandhi and his practices.But it is shame to us that people usually find bravery to make a joke of this Mhatma.In all over the world, his methods were easily misinterpreted by Westerners. In order to fathom what he was about, westerners fluctuated between hyper-difference, in which Gandhi was seen as the inexplicable product of a foreign culture; and over-likeness, in which they found similarities that were not really there. The real Gandhi lay somewhere in between. The concept of non violence and making the country fre is somehow related to some basic experiments what this Mahatma did during the first cycle of our great revolution.it is being explained by some of our modern philosophers that gandhi was somehow a little bit controversial about his experiments can be eventually compared with the hindu religion.Gandhi departed from Hindu orthodoxy in two significant ways: on nonviolence and on caste. Ahimsa, or nonviolence, maintained that all killing should be avoided to accrue spiritual merit. Gandhi, who had encounters with poisonous snakes in South Africa and rabid dogs in India, redefined the concept and mandated killing for humanitarian purposes, as in the euthanasia of rabid dogs. If some Hindus were alienated by his lack of orthodoxy on ahimsa, many more fell out with him over his championing of the untouchables, the lowest of India's castes.in most of the part of our contry we common people still having this disease what we call as a regional old manuscripted thought where the people from lower caste should not be touched. In traditional Hindu belief, an untouchable's contact with the person, food, or drink of a member of a higher caste would defile that person. For orthodox Hindus, it was a scripturally enjoined inequality, a product of individual karma (action) and performance of dharma (dedication to a calling), and a proof of the cycle of sansar (reincarnation). Gandhi never succeeded in justifying his stance against untouchability; in the end, he simply asserted that Hinduism needed to change.Attempting to understand Gandhi fares no better if he is misconstrued as a product of Indian asceticism. Although Gandhi followed various ascetic regimens such as brahmacharya (celibacy), his purpose was to gain the strength for successful worldly action, rather than to accumulate spiritual merit. Just as mistakenly, Gandhian protest can take on the guise of things.it is not a matter a joke when there was a time people started to follow a person just by hearing his speech.in the stories and fairy tales we have heard the youngesters started to follow the witch or fairy because of her hyptonacy.But this was not the case at the time of slavery,where people from our country started to listen a particular person.It was the magic and poer of a mahatma whose theory and style somehow reflects the hope to get the freedom from slavery.Westerners already know well. Attempting to see in Gandhian nonviolence a form of Christian nonresistance glosses over the activist, confrontational element in Gandhism. Gandhi wanted worldly success, the independence of India, not divine martyrdom. He made salt, he burned cloth, he led boycotts, he was thrown in prison, but he never waited around to be thrown to the lions. The concepts of Gandhian nonviolence and pacifism are not at all close. Gandhi did not believe in turning the other cheek in every situation―evil had to be resisted, best done nonviolently, but better by violence than not at all. Passive resistance was the term that Gandhi originally used for his South African protest, but he soon disowned the term in favor of his neo-locution, satyagraha or soul-force. For Gandhi, passive resistance was a weapon of the weak, used expediently, not morally, when violence was impossible or too costly. When Gandhi pondered the case of the British suffragettes and Irish Republican hunger-strikers offering passive resistance in jail, he saw an essential coercive element in the protests, which made them akin to violent resistance. Such passive resistors were perpetrating nonviolence to extract concessions from their enemies. The purpose of India's nonviolent resisters, in Gandhi's terms, was to suffer nonviolently to engender trust and respect in their opponents. Civil disobedience against the state, and the anarchist spirit of protest it represented, was also a departure from the Gandhian concept. Civil disobedience as proposed by Thoreau and practiced by anarchists depended on individual acts. Mass action was suspect because participants might not share the same conviction or some might feel coerced into action.
In Gandhian protest, civil disobedience could begin with individual acts, but only for the purpose of mobilizing mass protest. Otherwise, civil disobedience was an ego trip, not a moral action. Gandhi's truth was not just a product of his Indian tradition; nor was he parroting methods already known in the West. It was a syncretism of Western and Indian practices that drew upon Gandhi's experiences living in England, South Africa, and India. By 1918 Gandhi had put together the three most important elements of his philosophy―namely, morally informed nonviolence, mass civil disobedience, and courageous suffering.
The concept was almost as strange to Indians as it was later to Americans. In the West, Gandhi was perceived as powerful for his ability to hold back threatened violence from the Indian masses. That power was taken as spiritual. Gandhi "suffers himself to be adored," as one New York Times commentator put it. Another commented that Gandhi's penitential fasting for political ends illustrated the "difference between East and West." A Gandhi sanctified in this manner spoke to American social activists only as a saint―which meant that he was heard best by Christian militants, rather than by secular ones, and that his work was taken as prophecy, not politics. Even this depended on seeing Christ like qualities in Gandhi and in tailoring nonviolent resistance to Christian nonresistance and pacifism. This over-likeness grew stronger from the 1920s on as Gandhi's influence over Indian nationalism developed and as more and more American clergymen went to India to meet the Mahatma and bring his ideas home. John Haynes Holmes, a Protestant minister, pacifist, and activist with A. J. Muste's Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR) was a major agent of Western over-likeness. He began to preach a Christianized version of Gandhi and Gandhism as early as 1918 and met the Mahatma in 1931. In a 1922 sermon, Holmes said that "Gandhi is thus undertaking to do exactly what Jesus did when He proclaimed the kingdom of God on earth." For many U.S. activists in the 1930s, even Christian ones, a Christ-like Gandhi gave no political direction. A. J. Muste remembered the period with regret: "In the thirties . . . we faced a terrible situation . . . .I did not know how to apply nonviolent methods effectively to the situation. The effort to apply Gandhian methods to American conditions had scarcely begun. Pacifism was mostly a middle-class and individualistic phenomenon." Rejecting Christ and a Christ-like Gandhi, Muste turned to Trotsky and Communism for a period.

Hanging Kasab............

Hanging the Kasab the topic is very Argumentative and need much more mature knowledge and dimension.Justice is not just hanging a person.It serves to set an example so that in future no onewould try to do the crime again.By delivering a death sentence to Kasab we cannot root out terrorism.How will a person who does not fear death he will be forced to be moved to realise that what he has done was wrong?So many people are daily killed day by day and the count is still going on.The very fact that you say he has killed many so deserves death brings out the very “emotional” argument . If you were to rationally think about this you would not say this.Indians were killed,We were attacked.Obviously a lot of incidents was flowing.the count and the happenings are going on.In times of crisis more than the enemy we need to fight with our own bodies.we as a human being we are reponsible for producing terror and terrorist in our society.we never think about the root cause and always try to find the shortCut solutionStill the second argument occurs Death of Kasab will make him a martyr in the eyes of other jehadis and the jehadis and Kasab himself will believe that he will reach Jannat. So the punishment won’t serve any purpose.this is the general thought what terrorist think before going to do attacks.Then about the money.Many thoughts were crossing my mind while reading people’s views on Kasab.In your rebuttal to this point ,you have kind of accepted the validity of the argument and your argument in effect proves mine.the incidents which are happening now days are we ever bother about these why it happened and who is the main culprit as a wholeWhat is terror?Why are we so enraged with just Kasab?What about the terror within?Militant groups? Religious fundamentalists, political parties….all are tacitly trying to break the fabric of this nation.We should be vocal about them too!Humlog yaha kuchh jyada conservative ho jate hain bahut sare cases aise bhi hain jaha killing hoti hai but we just neglect them. A Hindu terrorist killed a Christian missionary 12 years ago and is running Scot free!No body cares! He is a terrorist too.He too threats the country!why does no one speak about him? A group of people break down a heritage mosque in the nation!it takes 19 years for the verdict to come,no one cares!25 years on victims of riots get no justice!no one talks about them,this is definitely a rare case.But the incidents i mentioned were terrorizing too.About this case.Yes he deserves a harsh punishment.I never had any difference of opinion on that.But death is not that punishment.The burden of life is much heavier to carry for these men who were on a mission of death.just tell me if we are going to hang Kasab will this incidents will be removed ,it might be possible more of our people will be killed in blasts and etc.there should be some permanent solution about this.Moreover corollaries with Kandahar incident seem futile.that incident was an example of ineptitude and inefficiency on part of the erstwhile government in power.Speculating on that is a futile exercise.Moreover we have no right to take lives.Kasab killed cause he was blinded by faith.We want him hanged cause we are blinded by vengeance,in the end if we demand his hanging why we sink to the same lowliness that he is in now.Now we come on main root does our religion anytime says he is bullshit person because he is from a specific religion,we should not live at a particular city or town because that is filled with the people of a specific religion.we worship our holy book without reading or knowing about this .because there is no habit in our family to know the truth and the root reason.we are following whatever our old species followed.If believing in a god or gods is good, then why is so much pain and suffering caused by religion--like the crusades, suicide bombings,etc?If believing in a god or gods is good, then why is so much pain and suffering caused by religion--like the crusades, suicide bombings, etc., etc?This is a question we hear very often, and there are a number of ways of approaching the issue. meri baatein bahut hi odd aur behisab lag rahi hongi but just think about this.I'd like to try a scientific approach.The position is that religion causes war. Just like, say, alcohol causes inebriation and sunlight makes things grow.If we wanted to test the alcohol/inebriation or sun/growth hypotheses scientifically, what would we do? Quite simple: Remove the alcohol from whatever drinks we are serving and see if our clients are still inebriated. Same with the sun/growth theory: Remove the sunlight and see if things still grow.With the religion/war hypothesis, we don't have to actually make a clinical study--it's already been done for us. In the 20th century, we saw the most disastrous wars of history, both in Europe and in the Far East. Tell me, which of these were centered around religious disputes?I can't speak on behalf of other religions, but I can tell you that many of the great prophets of Judaism spoke of the value of peace even in a time when war was the accepted state of affairs. Isaiah's words are inscribed on the wall of the United Nations: "And they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation shall not lift up sword upon nation, neither shall they learn war any more."This is not the first case when it is happening the world has seen a very cruel incidents in the form of holocaust and still the count is going on in the form of terrorist attacks in all over the world.i know jo bhi log mare hain mumbai blast me unko dilasa dena bahut muskil hai lekin kasab ko just latkane se kuchh nahi hoga usko ya fir is theory ko hi hatana hoga which is producing a lot of kasabs in the society......

fight on the name of religion

Most people who believe in a certain religion, won't actually say that their religion is better than yours, however, there's not a doubt in my mind that at one point in their life, they actually thought it.I have so many people in my friend list who does argument always that their religion is better than any of the religion why this is like this?Just the actual thought of somebody thinking that their religion is better than yours, probably separates them from their own religious beliefs. I can't think of one religion that doesn't imply that their religion is the only way to salvation or to the promised land.No religion gives u permission to do violence but it is almost rived regularly on the name of religion.Once this thought becomes dominant in your mind, and you actually believe that your religion truly is better than all others and it is the only way to salvation or to the promised land, you're probably in too deep. I can't tell you how many times I've heard this simple statement or been able to read it on someone else's face like a glaring red beacon flashing over an airportst of the people in my family too deoes not know the history of their religion to.oo ,in spite of thisype about u t they worship sculptures and argue faltu type about religions.If you don't believe that some people think that their religion is better than others, I would like to challenge you to put it to a test. Simply ask someone if they are thinking about switching over to a different religion.

You're rarely going to hear someone tell you that they are, you're probably going to see a puzzled look on their face, providing you with the answer, without even opening up their mouths. There's a good chance that these people will tell you," No, they have never even thought about joining another religion." The problem is, they've probably never even spent the time to think about whether their religion is right or wrong.

I can't tell you how many people, that I meet on a regular basis, believe that their religious views are right and all others are now wrong. I can however tell you, that most of these people haven't took the time to study the origins of their beliefs thoroughly.

How can you judge another religion, when you don't really understand your own? If you have studied early hinduaism, like I have, there's a good chance that you won't ever again go around telling someone or even thinking it silently to your self, that your religion is actually better than someone else's.

Atheism part two

Atheism is not a belief that there is no God—it is the absence of belief in God. I am an atheist not because I am 100% sure that there is no God—how does one prove the negative anyway?—but because I see as little evidence around me for God as for flying fairies or invisible spiritual power. I’m open to evidence that any of those exist, but in the absence of such evidence, I will not believe in them.

God didn't create people, but you, religious people, created God in an effort to explain your fears, the unknown, the fear of death and a promised life after death, you fear death, you people need someone to take care of you, someone to protect you when you feel weak, the sum of what we don't know.. God is a creature of human thinking: you people created God because you needed something to believe in..

Look at it.. you people created Judaism, Christianity and finally Islam.. These religions preach the same lie, but they are full of contradictions.. you could not even agree on one religion or sect! Human nature at its best!

Religion is an idea.. worshiping something, a "super power", is a human need. Look at your history, you started worshiping small statuettes, then you evolved into worshiping one "super power": the sun (Akhenaten), then the idea of one almighty God came.. then version one of monotheism, Judaism, appeared, then a new upgraded version took control, finally appeared with Islam.. and who knows what is going appear next. Evolutions applies to human nature also, it applies to religion.

Aligarh Muslim University exam Part two

As I have stated,we were traveling in the train with somehow in difficult but exiting situation.The incident happened with the girl was also memorable.but the connection was only for two hours.Somehow the train reached at its destination at 10 o clock in the night.There was a huge crowd gathered at the station claiming to provide best accommodation for one night stay for upcoming exam.as we had heard only about the city but not experienced before ,we were hesitating to take a room.My nephew was hungry and it was his first time to come to Delhi (outside without his parents)it was my responsibility to arrange the things in proper manner.well, let me say, its not easy to move. when it happens, its sad. you loose a lot of friends. you have to change you habits. you have to talk to new people. and that's hard. because you have to try to trust the new ones. yes, you can stay in contact with your contacts, but it Nieveslast's long. you lose contact after a while. then when you reach the new town you have to learn all the areas, or you will get lost.The most dangerous situation was that it was the situation of communal riot there.we were not aware of the heat and effects of riot in the daily life(lack of experience).the real issue in explaining riots, I argue, is not which local political or sociological factors increase the likelihood of violence, but whether the level of government responsible for law and order (the 28 states, in India’s federal system) chooses to prevent violence or intervene quickly to stop it when it does break out. Rioters are not heroes and the state police and paramilitary forces – even in states like Bihar where the general quality of administration is far from high – have shown themselves capable of preventing communal riots when given the right direction by their ministers.Now here is the discussion arises about Communal riots we should try to talk Communal riots are a dangerous and a frightful phenomena and a curse for our society. Not only does a communal riot ends up in loss of lives and property, it divides and polarizes the society and gives rise to vicious political debates.Now in 21st century People are so much civilized and scholar then why we are gatting and facing the problem like this,when prople are killed by people just on the basis of ruthles theological matters.A lot of literature has been written and studies conducted on the issue of communal riots in India. But author of these studies are often labelled as ideologically colored rendering their work unacceptable by 'other' ideological camp. Hence, it'll be an informative and revealing exercise to see, direct from newspaper reports, that what causes these communal riots?Two things should be followed.First, the cause of a communal riot should be seen and understood direct from the newitems in the newspaper. Understanding and reconstructing the chain of event from political commentators and inquery commissions will reduce the truth element. The newspaper report can also be politically motived and biased but the likelihood of ideology contaminating the truth in a credible way is much less in case of newsitems as compared to reports of inquiry commisions and political commentators. One can always refer to multiple newspaper and reasonably filter out the truth.Second, the news of communal riot should be studied and analyzed at the time of its occurance itself. Analyzing such an event after lapse of time makes it more difficult to sift facts from ideologically-motived fiction. Since we, unfortunately, have so many communal riots, the sample size is not a problem in such a study and we have enough number of instances of communal riots where such a study can be done.Let us take the latest riot happened in one of the popular state ,I am not blaiming to any body ,but it can not be lied the role of state government in that situation.the state complicity by delineating a wider shift in Indian politics. The state government’s delay in calling in the army established beyond doubt that the anti-minority pogrom was being carried out with the involvement of not only the politicians but the state machinery as well. As in most riots in the country before and after Independence, minorities suffered disproportionately in Gujarat. He argues that ethnic riots are far from being spontaneous eruptions for a clear electoral purpose. Subsequently, it then follows these very political agenda. Instrumental political explanations for violence have been labeled ‘unsatisfactory’ not only by Wilkinson but also by other theorists. The second major problem identified by Wilkinson, with many political explanations for ethnic violence is that they fail to account for the variation in patterns of violence within states. In order to clear any confusion arising out of the critics made against the existing theories, Wilkinson posits three possible explanations for the differences in state performance. First, decades of corruption, criminalization, politicization and a general lack of state capacity have left Indian state governments too weak to prevent riots. Second, Indian state governments are unable or unwilling to protect minorities because they systematically under-represent them within their governments, police forces and local administration. Lastly and most importantly, the degree of party competition affects the value governments place on attracting ‘Muslim swing voters’, which effects whether or not the government will order the respective administrations to protect the minorities. He focuses on state and town level electoral incentives which remain important even if we assume various other factors, socio-economic and otherwise to be constant and controlled. Wilkinson argues that to win an election it is not necessary to appeal to each and every voter but to the voters who fear the consequences of not taking a defensive stand against the members of the other community.Three kinds of situations may develop which prove that as electoral competition increases, the level of riots goes down. First, the existence of three or more parties provides a security blanket to the minorities as the importance of swing votes increases provided the majority party is not trying to attract the fringe Hindu votes. A bi-polar state party system creates a potentially dangerous situation for the minorities, especially when the majoritarian party, which owns the anti-minority issues, tries to foment violence. The third situation can be exemplified by Gujarat and the events that unfolded in that state in the year 2002. The number of elections that are preceded by communal killings has taken an upswing over the years, especially since the Hindu nationalist BJP gained political prominence.The Way to Communal Harmony is a compilation of Gandhi's reflections on certain problems which divide mankind. Though they deal immediately with India, their validity extends beyond the circumstances of our country. Everywhere in the world, individuals and groups are divided because of fear, suspicion and hatred. It depends on local conditions whether the division expresses itself along religious, economic, political, caste or colour lines. Whatever be the form, insecurity is perhaps the major cause of individual and social dissensions. A person who. is integrated and sure of himself fears none and consequently provokes no fear. We have occasional examples of such heroic individuals, but we have not till now had instances, of societies or communities that are fully integrated and therefore fearless.Now we came on the scenario.we are standing on the station and waiting somebody who was providing a room..