" निखिलेणानुपूर्व्या च पिता  पुत्राणिवोरसान
  शुश्रूशान्ते च वः शिष्या कच्चिद् वर्मसु  दंशिताः
  इति वः पुरुषव्याग्रह सदा रामोभिभाषते
  व्यसनेषु  मनुष्याणां  भृशम् भवति दुःखितः
  उत्सवेषु च सर्वेषु  पितेव परितुष्यति  "
 रामायण : २. २. ३९

which means :
 " Ram behaved like a father to the people
  He sympathized with the people in their sorrows
  And was pleased like a father when the people celebrated festivals "
Ramayana : 2.2.39

Sex Workers
 In India perhaps there are millions of sex workers ( prostitutes ).
   A person becomes a prostitute not because she enjoys it but because of poverty. It is one of the worst kinds of exploitation of a human being by other human beings. Society must have sympathy towards the sex workers and must not look down upon them. They are also entitled to a life of dignity as envisaged by Article 21 of the Constitution.
 In the novels and stories of the great Bengali Writer Sharat Chand Chattopadhyaya, many prostitutes have been shown to be women of very high character, e.g., Rajyalakshmi in 'Shrikant', Chandramukhi in 'Devdas' etc.
The plight of prostitutes has been depicted by the great Urdu poet Sahir Ludhianvi in his poem 'Chakle' which has been sung in the Hindi film Pyasa  (Jinhen Naaz Hai Hind Par Wo Khan Hain, which is the simplified version of the verse 'Sana khwan- e-taqdees-e-Mashrik kahan hain').
We may also refer to the character Sonya Marmelodova in Dostoyevsky's famous novel 'Crime and Punishment'. Sonya is depicted as a girl who sacrifices her body to earn some bread for her impoverished family.
Reference may also be made to Amrapali, who was a contemporary of Lord Buddha.
 Sex among human beings is different from sex among animals. Sex in humans has a cultural aspect to it also, and is not just a physical act. A sex worker who has to surrender her body to a man for money obviously is not leading a life of dignity. Ordinarily, no woman will willingly surrender her body to a man unless she loves and respects him. A sex worker is obviously not surrendering her body to a man because she loves and respect him, but just for sheer survival. As Nancy says in Charles Dicken's novel `Oliver Twist', "you adapt or you die".

 Apart from that, sex workers are always in danger of getting sexually transmitted diseases (STD), and they are often exploited, abused and beaten by the proprietors of the brothel and others who give them a pittance out of her earnings. There are several million sex workers in India, many even from Nepal, Bangaldesh, and even from the former Soviet Union. This is due to massive poverty in the country, and abroad.

 Our effort must be to educate the public and inform them that sex workers are not bad persons, but they are unfortunate girls who have been forced to go into this flesh trade due to terrible poverty. Hence society should not look down upon the sex workers but should have sympathy with them.
 I have already referred to the novels of the great Bengali writer Sharat Chandra Chattopadhyaya about the plight of sex workers, and the same has been shown in the novels of many European writers.
 Thus, the Russian writer Dostoyevsky's novel `Crime & Punishment' has shown Sonia Marmeladova as a woman of high character who became a sex worker to feed her starving family. Similarly, in Charles Dicken's novel `Oliver Twist', the sex worker Nancy is shown to be a girl of high character who sacrifices her life to save Oliver. In Victor Hugo's famous novel `Les Miserables', Fantine sacrifices her hair and teeth to provide for her daughter Cosette. Martha in `David Copperfield' is also depicted as a woman of noble heart.

 In this connection I may quote an Urdu sher ( couplet ) :
"Pinhaa tha daam-e-sakht qareeb aashiyaan ke
Udhne hi na paaye the ki giraftaar hum hue "

The above sher (couplet) of the great Urdu poet Mirza Ghalib, was used by me in my order in the Supreme Court in Budhadev Karmaskar vs. State of West Bengal, Cr.Appeal 135/2010

The word 'pinha' means 'hidden' or 'concealed', 'daam' means 'net', 'sakht' means 'hard' or 'cruel', 'qareeb' means 'near', 'aashiyaan' means 'nest', and 'giraftaar' means 'caught' or 'arrested'.

The sher therefore means :

"Near the nest was the hidden cruel net (of a hunter)
Even before the chick could take its first flight it was caught".

I used the sher to compare these innocent young girls to the chick which is caught in the net of the cruel hunter in its very first flight. In other words, these young girls, who should have had a life of happiness before them, have their lives destroyed at a very early age..

In India perhaps there are millions or sex workers (prostitutes), the exact number of which is uncertain.. They have been driven into this profession not because they enjoy it but because of abject poverty. The massive poverty of about 75% of our population of 1250 million people is the real cause of exploitation of women. To fill their stomachs these poor girls have to sell their bodies. These girls should have had a life of happiness, but instead they get caught in the flesh trade because of their poverty at a very young age and their lives are ruined.

These girls come into the flesh trade not because they enjoy it but because of abject poverty. They become practically slaves of the brothel owners, and are pitilessly exploited, and often brutally treated. Once they enter the flesh trade they became social outcastes for the so called ‘decent’ society.Surely it cannot be said they enjoy a life of dignity envisaged by Article 21 of the Constitution.

Buddhadev Karmaskar vs. State of West Bengal, Criminal Appeal No. 135 of 2010 was a case which came up before a bench of the Supreme Court of which I was the senior member. The appellant had brutally killed a sex worker, and we upheld his conviction. However, having dismissed the appeal, we suo motu converted it into a P.I.L. for rehabilitating sex workers.

We were of the view that if sex workers were given some technical training they could earn their bread through this technical skill, instead of by selling their bodies. Hence we directed the Central and State Governments to prepare schemes for rehabilitating the sex workers, and we also set up a Committee, headed by a senior lawyer of the Supreme Court, to monitor this exercise.
 We knew that by merely passing judicial orders this great social injustice cannot be abolished. That will take time. But we wanted to create an awareness of the problem, so that the people, particularly our young people, start thinking seriously about it and find out ways and means of solving it, in a humanitarian way, so that these young innocent girls can be rehabilitated in society.

Sarita Devi
I had been critical of Sarita Devi's behaviour at the medal presentation ceremony at the recent Asian Games in South Korea, and I agree with the AIBA chief, Ching-kuo Wu that her behaviour was  totally unacceptable.
  That having been said, the question now is : should the AIBA ( the International Amateur Boxing Association ) ban her from participating in boxing competitions ? From the tough words used by Mr. Wu, it seems that some harsh punishment is being contemplated by the AIBA.
 Sarita Devi has realized her mistake and has apologized several times. That being so, I think the AIBA should let her off with a stern warning that this kind of misbehaviour will not be tolerated in future.
  The AIBA should be reminded of the famous speech on mercy by Portia in Shakespeare's ' Merchant of Venice ' :
 " The quality of mercy is not strained
    It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
    Upon the place beneath. It is twice blest
    It blesseth him that gives, and him that takes "

The Emperor Akbar ( 1542-1605 )
 The architect of modern India was the great Mughal Emperor Akbar who gave equal respect to people of all communities and appointed them to the highest offices on their merits irrespective of their religion, caste, etc.
The Emperor Akbar held discussions with scholars of all religions and gave respect not only to Muslim scholars, but also to Hindus, Christians, Parsis, Sikhs, etc. Those who came to his court were given respect and the Emperor heard their views, sometimes alone, and sometimes in the Ibadatkhana (Hall of Worship) in Fatehpur Sikri, where people of all religions assembled and discussed their views in a tolerant spirit.
 The Emperor declared his policy of Suleh-e-Kul, which means universal toleration of all religions and communities. He abolished Jeziya in 1564 and the pilgrim tax in 1563 on Hindus and permitted his Hindu wife to continue to practise her own religion even after their marriage. This is evident from the Jodha Bai Palace in Fatehpur Sikri which is built on Hindu architectural pattern.
 In 1578, the Parsi theologian Dastur Meherji Rana was invited to the Emperor s Court and he had detailed discussions with Emperor Akbar and acquainted him about the Parsi religion. Similarly, the Jesuit Priests Father Antonio Monserrate, Father Rodolfo Acquaviva and Father Francisco Enriques etc. also came to the Emperor's Court on his request and acquainted him about the Christian religion. The Emperor also became acquainted with Sikhism and came into contact with Guru Amar Das and Guru Ram Das (see `The Mughal Empire by R.C. Majumdar).
 Thus, as stated in the Cambridge History of India (Vol.IV The Mughal Period) Emperor Akbar conceived the idea of becoming the father of all his subjects, rather than the leader of only the Muslims, and he was far ahead of his times. As mentioned by Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru in `The Discovery of India , Akbar's success is astonishing, for he created a sense of oneness among the diverse elements of India.
 In 1582, the Emperor invited and received a Jain delegation from Ahmedabad consisting of Hiravijaya Suri, Bhanuchandra Upadhyaya and Vijayasena Suri. Jainism, with its doctrine of non-violence, made a profound impression on the Emperor, and influenced his personal life. He curtailed his food and drink and ultimately abstained from flesh diet altogether for several months in the year. He renounced hunting which was his favourite pastime, restricted the practice of fishing and released prisoners and caged birds. Slaughter of animals was prohibited on certain days and ultimately in 1587 for about half the days in the year.
 Akbar's contact with Jains began as early as 1568, when Padma Sunder who belonged to the Nagpuri Tapagaccha was honoured by him.
 As mentioned in Dr. Ishwari Prasad s `The Mughal Empire' , the Jains had a great influence on the Emperor. A disputation was held in Akbar's court between the Jain monks Buddhisagar of Tapgaccha and Suddha Kirti of Khartargaccha on the subject of the Jain religious ceremony called Pansadha in which the winner was given the title Jagatguru by Akbar.
 Having heard of the virtues and learning of Hir Vijaya Suri in 1582 the Emperor sent an invitation to him through the Mughal Viceroy at Ahmedabad. Hirvijaya Suri accepted the invitation in the interests of his religion. He was offered money by the Viceroy to defray the expenses of the journey but he refused. The delegation consisting of Hir Vijaya Suri, Bhanu Chandra Upadhyaya and Vijaya Sen Suri started on their journey and walked on foot all the way from Ahmedabad to Fatehpur Sikri, subsisting on alms offered by people on the way, as was their custom.
 On reaching Fatehpur Sikri they were received with great honour befitting imperial guests. Hir Vijaya Suri first had discussions with Abul Fazl, one of Emperor Akbar's ' navratnas '. He propounded the doctrine of Karma and an impersonal God.
 When he was introduced to the Emperor he defended true religion and told him that the foundation of faith should be daya (compassion) and that God is one though he is differently named by different faiths.
 The Emperor received instruction in Dharma from Suri, who explained the Jain doctrines to him. He discussed the existence of God and the qualities of a true Guru and recommended non-killing (Ahinsa). The Emperor was persuaded to forbid the slaughter of animals for six months in Gujarat and to abolish the confiscation of the property of deceased persons, the Sujija Tax (Jeziya) and a Sulka (possibly a tax on pilgrims) and to free caged birds and prisoners.
 Hirvijaya Suri and his companion Jain monks stayed for four years at Emperor Akbar's court, and left for Gujarat in 1586. They imparted a knowledge of Jainism to Akbar and obtained various concessions for their religion.
 The Emperor is said to have taken a vow to refrain from hunting and gave up eating meat on Fridays, Sundays, and some other days, as mentioned in Ain-i-Akbari by Abul Fazl. In fact he expressed a desire to give up meat- eating for ever as it had become repulsive to him. The killing of animals was forbidden for certain days.
 Before the Jain monks left Fatehpur Sikri, the Emperor presented to them the Padma Sundar scriptures which had been preserved in his palace library. He offered these to the Jain monks as a gift, knowing that they would not accept anything else, and they were pressed by the Emperor to accept them.
 Emperor Akbar was a propagator of Suleh-i-Kul (universal toleration of all religions) at a time when Europeans were indulging in religious massacres e.g. the St.Bartholomew Day massacre in 1572 of Protestants, (called Huguenots) in France by the Catholics, the burning at the stake of Protestants by Queen Mary of England, the massacre by the Duke of Alva of tens of thousands of Protestants for their resistance to Rome, and the burning at the stake of Jews during the Spanish Inquisition.
 We may also mention the subsequent massacre of the Catholics in Ireland by Cromwell, and the mutual massacre of Catholics and Protestants in Germany during the Thirty Year War from 1618 to 1648 in which the population of Germany was reduced from 18 million to 12 million.
 Thus, Emperor Akbar was far ahead of even the Europeans of his times.
 It was because of the wise policy of toleration of the Great Emperor Akbar that the Mughal empire lasted for so long. The same wise policy of toleration and respect for all religions alone can keep our country together despite so much diversity.

The Decimal System in Mathematics
 Today even a child knows the decimal system in arithmetic, but few people know its historical significance
The invention of the decimal system by Indians was perhaps the most revolutionary and greatest scientific achievement in the ancient world, and without it, progress in science would have been extremely slow.
The numbers in the decimal system were called Arabic numerals by the Europeans, but surprisingly the Arab scholars called them Hindu numerals. Were they really Arabic or Hindu?
 In this connection it may be mentioned that the languages Urdu, Persian, Arabic and Hebrew are written from right to left, but if you ask any speaker of these languages to write any number selected at random, e.g. 257 or 1096, he will write the number from left to right. What does this show ? This shows that these numbers were taken from a language which was written from left to right and not from right to left, and it is accepted universally now that these numbers came from India, and they were copied by the Arabs from us, who then passed them over to the Europeans.
I would like to explain the revolutionary significance of the decimal system.
 As we all know, ancient Rome was a great civilization, the civilization of Caesar and Augustus, but if one would have asked an ancient Roman to write the number one million he would have almost gone crazy. This is because the ancient Romans felt very uncomfortable with numbers above 1000. And that is because the ancient Romans wrote their numbers in alphabets, I denoting 1, II denoting 2, V denoting 5, X denoting 10, L denoting 50, C denoting 100, D denoting 500, and M denoting 1000.
 In the Roman numerals there is no single alphabet denoting a number greater than  M, which stands for millenium or one thousand. So to write 2000 an ancient Roman had to write MM, to write 3000 he had to write MMM, and to write one million he had to write M one thousand times, which would have driven him crazy.
On the other hand, under our system to express one million we have just to write the number one followed by six zeros.
In the Roman numerals there is no zero. Zero was an invention of ancient India and progress was not possible without this invention.
 Here I may explain that these numbers 1,2,3, etc do not really exist in the objective universe. What exists is 1 man, 2 trees, 3 tables, 4 houses, etc. The numbers 1,2,3,4, etc are pure abstractions having no actual physical existence in the objective universe. It required a flight of imagination to conceive of numbers in the abstract. This flight was no doubt achieved by the ancient Greeks and Romans.
  But it required a further flight of imagination, to imagine the number 0, and this the ancient Europeans never achieved on their own, but could get only from Indians ( through the Arabs, as mentioned before ).
I am not going into details about the great contributions of our renowned mathematicians like Aryabhatta, Brahmagupta, Bhaskar, Varahamihira etc. One can read about it in the Google Website. Also, see books on ancient Indian mathematics, e.g. ' History of Hindu Mathematics ' by B.Datta and A. N. Singh, ' History of Science and Technology in Ancient India ' by D.P. Chattopadhyaya, etc.
Aryabhatta in his famous book called the Aryabhatiya wrote about algebra, arithmetic, trigonometry, quadratic equations and the sine table. He calculated the value of Pi at 3.1416, which is close to the actual value which is about 3.14159. Aryabhatta's works were later adopted by the Arabs and others.
.
 However, I may just give two simple illustrations in this connection.

The number 1,00,000 is called a lakh in the Indian numeral system.  100 lacs is called one crore, 100 crores is called one arab, 100 arabs is called one kharab, 100 kharabs is called one neel, 100 neels is called one padma, 100 padmas is called one shankh, 100 shankh is called one mahashankh, etc. Thus one mahashankh will be the number 1  followed by 19 zeros (for further details you may see V.S. Apte's Sanskrit English Dictionary in Google). On the other hand the ancient Romans could not express any number larger than one thousand except by repeating M and the other alphabets again and again.

Take another illustration.  According to the Vishnu Purana, the Kaliyuga in which we are living consists of 4, 32, 000 years. The preceding Yuga is known as the Dwapar Yug ( in which Lord Krishna lived ), and was said to be twice as long as the Kaliyuga.   Preceding the Dwapar Yug, was the Treta Yug ( in which Lord Rama lived ), which is thrice the duration of the Kaliyuga. The Yuga preceding Treta Yug is the Satyug which was said to be four times longer than the Kaliyuga.
 One Kaliyuga, one Dwapar Yug, one Treta Yug and one Satyug are collectively known as one Chaturyugi (or 43 lacs 20 thousand years). Fifty Six Chaturyugis are known as one Manovantar. Fourteen Manovantars is known as one Kalpa.  Twelve Kalpas make one day of Brahma.  Brahma is believed to have lived for billions or trillions of years.

When Hindus do the sankalp, which is to be done everyday by orthodox people, they have to mention the exact day, month and year of the Kaliyug as well as the Chaturyugi, Manovantar and Kalpa in which we are living.   It is said that we are living today in the 28th Chaturyugi in our present Manovantar, that is to say half the Manovantar of our Kalpa is over, but the remaining Manovantar is yet to be completed.  We are living presently  in the  Vaivasvata Manuvantar.
One may or may not believe the above system, but one can only marvel at the flight of imagination of our ancestors who could conceive of billions or trillions of years in history.

Panini
 Sanskrit is not just one language, there are several Sanskrits. What we  call Sanskrit today is really Panini's Sanskrit, also known as Classical Sanskrit or Laukik Sanskrit, and this is what is taught in our schools, colleges and universities today, and it is in this language that all our scientists, philosophers, poets, dramatists, mathematicians, astronomers, medical experts, grammarians, jurists, etc wrote their great works. However, there were earlier Sanskrits too which were somewhat different from Classical Sanskrit.

The earliest Sanskrit work is the Rig Veda, which was probably composed around 2000 B.C.  However, it was subsequently continued from generation to generation by oral tradition, and had to be memorized orally in the Gurukul by the young boys by repeating the verses chanted by their Guru.  The Rig Veda is the most sacred of Hindu literature, and it consists of 1028 hymns (richas) to various nature gods e.g. Indra, Agni, Surya, Soma, Varuna etc.

Language changes with passage of time. For instance, it is difficult to understand Shakespeare's plays today without a good commentary because Shakespeare wrote in the 16th Century A.D. and since then the English language has changed. Many of the words and expressions which were in vogue in Shakespeare's time are no longer in vogue today. For instance, in the very first scene of Shakespeare's 'Macbeth' ( which I read in my B.A. English Literature course in Allahabad University in 1964 ) we come across a word ' paddock'. This word, which means a frog or a toad, is no longer in vogue today. Hence we cannot understand Shakespeare's plays today without a good commentary.

Similarly, the Sanskrit language kept changing from around 2000 B.C. when the Rig Veda was composed to about 500 B.C. i.e. for about 1500 years. In the 5th Century B.C. the great scholar Panini, who was perhaps the greatest grammarian the world has ever seen, wrote his great book `Ashtadhyayi' (book of eight chapters). In this book Panini fixed the rules of Sanskrit, and thereafter no further changes in Sanskrit were permitted except slight changes made by two other great grammarians, namely, Katyayana who wrote his book called ‘Vartika’, and Patanjali who wrote his commentary on the Ashtadhyayi called the ‘Maha Bhashya’. Except for the slight changes by these two subsequent grammarians, Sanskrit as it exists today is really Panini's Sanskrit or Classical ( laukik ) Sanskrit.

What Panini did was that he studied carefully the existing Sanskrit language in his time and then refined, purified and systematized it so as to make it a language of great logic, precision and elegance.  Thus Panini made Sanskrit a highly developed and powerful vehicle of expression in which abstract and scientific ideas could be expressed with great precision and clarity.  This language was made uniform all over India, so that scholars from North, South East and West could understand each other.

I am not going into the details about the Ashtadhyayi but I will give one small illustration in this connection.

In the English language the alphabets from A to Z are not arranged in any logical or rational manner. There is no reason why F is followed by G or why P is followed by Q, etc. The alphabets in English are all arranged haphazardly and at random. On the other hand, Panini in his first fourteen Sutras arranged alphabets in the Sanskrit language in a very scientific and logical manner, after close observation of the sounds in human speech.

Thus, for example the vowels, a, aa, i, ee, u, oo, ae, ai, o, ou are arranged according to the shape of the mouth when these sounds are emitted, 'a' and 'aa', are pronounced from the throat, 'i' and 'ee' from the palate, 'o' and 'oo' from the lips, etc. In the same way the consonants have been arranged in a sequence on a scientific pattern. The 'ka' varga (i.e. ka, kha, ga, gha, nga) are emitted from the throat, the 'cha' varga from the palate, the  'ta' varga from the roof of the mouth, the 'ta' varga from the teeth, and the 'pa' varga from the lips.
 Moreover, in each of these vargas or sequences of 5 consonants, the second and the fourth are aspirants.
 An aspirant is a consonant combined with 'ha'. Thus 'ka'+'ha'= 'kha'. So 'kha', that is, the second letter in the 'ka' varga,is an aspirant.
 Similarly, ' gha', the fourth letter in the 'ka' varga, is also an aspirant, because it is made by combining 'ga' with 'ha'.
   Similarly, in each of the vargas or 5 consonant sequences, the second and the fourth is always an aspirant.
 ( It may be mentioned that many languages have no aspirants, e.g. Tamil, Kashmiri, etc. Even English has just one aspirant 'tha' as in 'think').
I venture to say that no language in the world has its alphabets arranged in such a rational and systematic manner. And when we see how deeply our ancestors went in the seemingly simple matter of arranging the alphabets we can realize how deeply they went in more advanced matters.

Panini's Sanskrit is called Classical Sanskrit, as I have already stated above, and it is in contrast with the earlier Vedic Sanskrit that is the language (or languages) in which the Vedas were written.
 All Sanskrit literature, except the Vedas ( which means 1. the Samhitas, 2. the Brahmanas, 3. the Aranyakas, and 4. the Upanishads ), was altered and made in accordance with Panini's grammar ( except some words called 'apashabdas' or 'apabhramshas' which were so enigmatic and inscrutable that they were left as they were ). Thus, the Ramayana, the Mahabharata, the Upanishads, etc, which though held in high respect by Hindus are not regarded as sacred as the Vedas, are all now in accordance with Panini's grammar, and hence easy to understand.
  However, one could not take this liberty with the Vedas. One could not alter the language of the Rigveda and make it in accordance with Panini's grammar. Panini or no Panini, one could not touch the Rigveda or the other Vedas, as they were held to be sacred

Sharat Chandra Chattopadhyaya ( 1876-1938 )
I was never a very social person, and my best companions even in my young days were my books. I would read whatever i could get hold of during my spare time.
  At a very young age, maybe when I was in school, which was over half a century ago ( I was born in 1946 ), I got hold of a novel called ' Shrikant ' by the famous Bengali writer Sharat Chandra Chattopadhyaya. The original was in Bangla, but there are excellent translations of the whole of Sharat Sahitya in Hindi, and so I read it in Hindi.
 Though it is almost 1000 pages long, the novel was so gripping that I could not leave it, except when I had to, till it was  finished.
 Thereafter I started reading the rest of Sharat Chandra's novels and short stories, and devoured them all. I read Grihadah, Charitraheen, Shesh Prashna, Palli Samaj, Pather Davi, Baradidi, Devdas, Chandranath, Biraj Bahu, Parinita, Kashinath,  Bipradas, Swami, Chabi, Bindur Chele, Patha Nirdesh, Anuradha, Subhada, Ramer Sumati, Mejdidi, and the rest. I was carried away into a different world.
  Sharat Chandra often said, e.g. in the beginning of Shrikanta, that he never depicted anything which he had not seen or experienced himself. His stories are consequently realistic.
  What strongly attracted me to Sharat Chandra's stories was the powerful attack he launched in them against oppression of women and the caste system, which had become inhuman in Bengal at that time. Girls were married in childhood, and often became child widows, because medical science was not then advanced, and the child- husband often died due to some infection or epidemic. Remarriage was not permitted by custom among caste Hindus, and so the young girl's life was spoilt. Often she was dumped in Kashi or Mathura by her father, and left to fend for herself ( by begging, prostitution or some other means ).
  In my opinion, no writer in the world has equalled Sharat Chandra in women's characterization. No doubt there are many great women characters in world literature, e.g. Anna Karenina by Tolstoy, Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert, Catherine by Emile Bronte ( in Wuthering Heights ), Lady Macbeth by Shakespeare, Scarlett Ohara by Margaret Mitchell ( in Gone With the Wind ), Sonia Marmaladova by Dostoevsky ( in Crime and Punishment ), Pilar ( in For Whom the Bell Tolls ) and Catherine ( in A Farewell to Arms ) by Hemingway, Tess by Thomas Hardy, Nana by Emil Zola, etc. but in my opinion no writer in the world has created such powerful women characters like Rajyalakshmi, Annada, Chandramukhi, Madhavi, Savitri, Bharati, Achala, Kiranmayi, Kamal, Parbati, Abhaya, Hemangani, Bhubaneshwari, Narayani, Digambari, Swarnamanjari, etc. No writer in the world except Sharat Chandra has written making women the central point of his works, and depicting their innermost emotions and sufferings.
 Sharat Chandra's powerful denunciation of oppression of women and the inhuman caste system played a great role in largely abolishing these social evils in Bengal. Today there is very little casteism in Bengal compared to other states like U.P. or Bihar, and women in Bengal have become largely emancipated.

Why all Indians should learn Hindi
In a previous post I had said that all Indians should learn Hindi, and now I will give my reasons. Many of these reasons have already been given in some previous posts on the topic which are on facebook and my blog justicekatju.blogspot.in, and which I will include in this post. That will relieve me of the burden of repeating the reasonings.
 However, before doing so let me say a few things.
 I know some people may not agree with me, and they are entitled to do so. After all, debate is healthy in a democracy, and everyone should be allowed to put his /her point of view.
 What I insist upon, however, is that this debate should be conducted in a polite and courteous manner, and not by hurling abuses. I am constrained to say this because many comments on my post ' The Languages of India ' and on my earlier posts on the subject were abusive and in highly objectionable language.
 For instance, one Tamilian insulted my mother tongue Hindi in highly derogatory language. I replied by saying that I had never insulted his mother tongue Tamil, rather I had always praised it and its great literature. So unless he apologizes he will be blocked. Instead of apologizing he again insulted my mother tongue Hindi. So I have blocked him, and he will remain blocked unless he apologizes.
  Therefore I am telling people who wish to join this debate : if you are unable or unwilling to use polite and civilized language in the discussion, please do not join the debate at all. One can disagree in courteous and civil language. If, however, you use abusive and impolite language you will immediately be blocked. So if you have any such urge to be impolite, just restrain it and back off, otherwise the consequences will follow.
 Secondly, I wish to make it clear that I am totally against imposition of Hindi on anyone. I am only giving my reasons why all Indians should learn Hindi ( without, of course, giving up their mother tongue, if it is not Hindi ). If my reasoning appeals to you then learn Hindi. If it does not, do not. Where is the problem now ?
 In fact Tamilians were learning Hindi upto the 1960s, and  would by now have learnt it ( without, of course giving up Tamil ) if some short sighted politicians in the North not tried to impose it in the South in the 1960s.
 So please do not distort my words and charge me with trying to impose Hindi on non Hindi speakers. I repeat, I am a totally democratic person, and am totally  against imposition of Hindi, but am trying to persuade ( not coerce ) non Hindi speakers in India to learn Hindi as that would be in their own interest. However if my reasoning does not appeal to you, please feel free to reject it.
 I am now re-posting some earlier posts on the subject.
 We may first understand what is Hindi.
 By 'Hindi' I am referring to simple Hindi, which is also called Hindustani or khariboli, the language of the common man in the Hindi speaking belt, and not literary ( or klisht ) Hindi.

What is Hindustani or Khariboli ?
 Hindustani or Khariboli is simple or spoken Hindi, as contrasted to literary Hindi which is used by many writers and public speakers.
 Hindi, i.e. Hindustani or Khariboli is an urban language.  It is the first language of the common man in the cities of what is known as the Hindi speaking belt (Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Delhi, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, etc.) and is the second language in the cities of many parts of the non-Hindi speaking belt, e.g. Punjab, Gujrat, West Bengal, Orissa, Kashmir, Maharashtra, North Eastern states, and even parts of south India. It is spoken not only in India but also in Pakistan, Nepal, Fiji, Mauritius, Surinam, Cities of Bangladesh,etc
How did Hindustani ( or Khariboli ) come into existence ? This is extremely important to understand if we wish to understand Hindi.
Almost all cities in the world originated as market places (mandis).  This was only possible when the productive forces had developed to an extent that people were producing more than they could themselves consume, and hence the surplus had to be sold or exchanged.  In other words, commodities (i.e. goods for sale or exchange,  and  not  for  self  consumption)  began  to be produced.
Since the seller and the purchaser had to have a known place where the transaction of sale and purchase could take place, market places (mandis) were created, which later became cities.
Now the seller and purchaser must have a common language, otherwise the transaction of sale would not be possible.  Hence Hindustani ( or Khariboli ) arose as that common language of the market.
To give an illustration, in Allahabad (where I have mostly lived) Khariboli is spoken in the city, but in the rural areas around Allahabad city the dialect spoken is Avadhi (in which Tulsidas wrote his Ramcharitmanas).  In Mathura city Khariboli is spoken, but in the rural areas around Mathura Brijbhasha (the language of Surdas) is spoken.  In Benaras city or the other eastern cities of U.P. and in western cities of Bihar, Khariboli is spoken, but in the rural areas around these cities Bhojpuri is spoken.  In parts of northern Bihar Maithili is the rural dialect (in which the great poet Vidyapati wrote) but in the cities there also Khariboli is spoken.  In Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh Khariboli is spoken in the cities, but in the rural areas local dialects (e.g. Mewari amd Marwari in Rajasthan) are spoken which an outsider cannot understand. In large parts of Jharkhand and Chattisgarh, though Gondvi is spoken in the rural and forest areas by the tribals, Khariboli is spoken in the cities.
This shows that in vast areas of north India the rural population speaks different dialects, but the urban population had a common language, Hindustani or Khariboli.  How did this happen?
This happened because a vast common market had been created in India (due to the development of the productive forces) even before the coming of the Mughals, and even before the time of the great sufi scholar and poet Amir Khusro ( 1253-1325 ). A trader traveling from Bihar or Madhya Pradesh could easily sell his goods in a city in Uttar Pradesh or Rajasthan or Punjab because there was a common language, Khariboli, which both seller and purchaser knew (apart from knowing their local dialects).
 Thus Khariboli emerged as the common language of the cities in large parts of India.  Even in many parts of the non-Hindi speaking belt Khariboli is understood and spoken as a second language.  Thus, if one goes to Kolkata or Bangalore or Gujarat or Lahore or Karachi or even in many parts of south India he can converse in Khariboli with people living in the cities (though there might be difficulty in rural areas).
                                   The Language Question
When I was Chief Justice of the Madras High Court I was invited to a function in Gulbarga. which is in northern Karnataka. I took a flight from Chennai to Hyderabad, and from there travelled to Gulbarga by taxi. A Professor of Gulbarga University had come to Hyderabad to accompany me to Gulbarga. The mother tongue of the Professor was Kannada, while the mother tongue of the taxi driver was Telugu, but they started talking to each other in Hindi. I was a bit surprised, and asked the Professor why he and the taxi driver were talking to each other in Hindi, when both were South Indians. He said that he did not understand Telugu, while the taxi driver did not know Kannada, but both knew Hindi. So the only way to communicate with each other was in Hindi.

I am relating this incident to say that in fact Hindi has become the link language of the whole of India. Even in the states where Hindi is not the mother tongue, it is known to people in these states, and that makes it easy to communicate. Thus, almost all Bengalis, Kashmiris, Punjabis, Gujratis, Oriyas, people of North Eastern and even most southern states can speak manageable Hindi.

The only problem is in Tamilnadu. There, too, Hindi was spreading due to Hindi films and the Hindi Prachar Sabhas, upto the 1960s when due to the anti-Hindi agitation Tamils stopped learning Hindi. There was a feeling among Tamils that Hindi was sought to be imposed on them, and this caused a reaction.

However, that is past history. I have been telling Tamilians that what has happened in the past has happened, but now they should start learning Hindi as it was in their interest to do so. This was because Tamilians face a lot of difficulty in communicating when they come out of Tamilnadu.
When I was saying this some time back in Anna University in Chennai one elderly Tamil gentleman stood up and said that Tamils knew English, and this was enough to communicate, so why should Tamilians learn Hindi ? I replied that it is not true that everyone in India knew English. It was only the 5% upper class who could speak English. If a Tamilian came to Delhi and took a taxi or auto he would not be able to communicate with the driver since the driver knew only Hindi.

I said I was opposed to imposing Hindi on the Tamils or anyone else. This was the age of democracy, and nothing should be imposed. However I was appealing to Tamilians to voluntarily learn Hindi, as that was in their own interest, and in fact many Tamilians told me that they made a big mistake by stopping learning Hindi in the 1960s. I said that they should now start learning it, or at least tell their children to do so, and most agreed with me.

While advising all Indians to learn Hindi, however, I wish to add two points :
(1) The local language should be promoted. For instance, I see no reason why the local language cannot be used in the High Courts. I myself often spoke in Hindi when I was a Judge of Allahabad High Court, and I see no reason why Tamil should not be used by lawyers when arguing before the Madras High Court, or other local languages when arguing in High Courts in states where that language is spoken. Of course if a Judge from another state has come to that High Court ( and Chief Justices all come from outside under the government policy), then English should be used, otherwise the Judge will not understand the argument. Also, judgments should all be in English, since all law reports are in English, and this enables lawyers and Judges in other states to read that judgment.

(2) Everyone in India should learn English. This is because all scientific literature in India is in English, and knowledge of science is essential for the country's progress. If one goes to an engineering college or medical college he will find that all the text books are in English. If one goes to a lawyers office anywhere in India he will find that almost all the law books in his library are in English. Similarly, books on history, geography, zoology, botany etc are almost all in English. How can one do without English ?
In this connection I may mention that when I was a Judge in the Allahabad High Court, the office bearers of the High Court Bar Association would invite me to the Hindi Diwas function which is held every year. I would tell them that it is better that I do not attend the function as I would say things which some people may not like. However, they would insist that I attend, and I ultimately agreed. When I would come to the function I heard some lawyers saying 'Angrezi dasi hai' (English is a slave girl), or 'Angrezi hatao' ( abolish English). When my turn came to speak I said that my mother tongue,too, is Hindi, but that does not mean that I should behave like a fool. I asked the audience whether they would like their children to prosper ? If they did, they must make them learn English, because scientific knowledge, and even knowledge in other subjects, is almost entirely in English. I said that it was silly to say 'Angrezi hatao' or 'Angrezi dasi hai'.

I would also like to add that simple Hindi, which is also called Hindustani or khariboli should be used instead of 'klisht' (literary) Hindi. In this connection I may mention that when I was a Judge of the Allhabad High Court a lawyer who always argues in Hindi appeared before me with a petition entitled 'Pratibhu Avedan Patra'. I asked him what 'pratibhu' meant. He said it meant a bail application. I told him that he should have used the word bail or zamanat, which everybody understands, instead of the word 'pratibhu' which no one, not even Hindi speakers, understand. Similarly, one day when I was on a morning walk near a military establishment in Allahabad I saw a board on which it was written 'Pravaran Kendra'. I could not understand the meaning of these words. I looked below where it was written in English 'Selection Centre'. I thought they should have written 'bharti daftar' which everyone would understand instead of 'Pravaran Kendra' which no one would understand.

It seems that after Independence in 1947 some people decided to remove Persian words which had become of common usage in Hindi, and replace them with Sanskritized words which no one understood. Thus, the word 'zila' (district), which everyone understands, was sought to be replaced by the word 'janapad'.

In my opinion this was wrong. A language becomes stronger if it adopts words from a foreign language, and it is a misconception that it becomes weaker. Thus, English has become stronger by adopting words from French, German, Arabic, Persian, Hindustani,etc. Hence one should not be intolerant in such matters, particularly when the foreign word has passed into common usage.

                                    An appeal to learn Hindi

I appeal to all Tamilians to learn Hindi. That does not mean I want imposition of Hindi. I am against imposition of anything. This is the age of democracy, and nothing should be imposed. But the fact is that Hindi has developed as the link language of India. When Tamilians come out of Tamilnadu they face a lot of problems since they do not know Hindi. So for purely practical reasons Tamilians should learn Hindi.

Once I said this in Anna University where I had been invited to give a talk. At the end of my talk one elderly gentleman ( perhaps a Professor ) stood up and said that English is already the link language of India, so why should Tamilians learn Hindi ? I replied that English is known only by the 10% or less elite class in India. If a Tamilian goes to, say, Delhi he has a lot of difficulty. The taxi and auto drivers do not know English, so there is a lot of difficulty in communication. Even people in many non Hindi states, e.g. West Bengal, Kashmir, Punjab, Orissa, Maharashtra, Gujrat, North East, and many people even in south Indian states know manageable Hindi ( apart from their mother tongues ). It is the main language even in the Andaman Islands ( as I found out when I went there ). Almost all Kashmiris, Punjabis, Gujratis, Maharashtrians, Bengalis,Oriyas, Nagas, Mizos, etc know Hindi.

In fact Tamilians were learning Hindi upto the 1960s ( due to Hindi films, Hindi Prachar Sabhas, etc ), but then there was a reaction because some short sighted North India politicians tried to impose Hindi, which was unfortunate. But that is a matter of the past, and we have to move ahead.

Some people said that Tamil should be the link language of India. but the fact is that Hindi is known by 15 times or so more people in India than Tamil, and it is spoken even in Pakistan,  (where it is called Urdu ), Nepal, Bangladesh, Fiji, Mauritius, Surinam ( formerly British Guina ), etc.
 I am not saying that Hindi is superior to Tamil. Tamil is a great language, with a very rich literature. I regard all languages as equal. But the fact is that Hindi is known by many more people in India, and even abroad, than Tamil, and it has already developed as the link language of India. So it is in the interest of Tamilians and other non Hindi speakers to learn Hindi
           My appeal to all non Hindi speakers is to think rationally and not emotionally. I am a totally democratic person, and am totally opposed to the imposition of Hindi in Tamil Nadu, or anywhere else for that matter. In the function at Anna University in Chennai, where I spoke recently, I advised Tamilians to learn Hindi. After my speech an elderly gentleman got up and said that Tamilians should not be compelled to learn Hindi, and English was good enough to be the link language in India. I replied that I was totally against any compulsion. If my suggestion that Tamilians should learn Hindi made sense to Tamilians, they should accept it, but if it did not make sense to them, they should reject it. Where is the compulsion? It is not fair to distort what I said.

 Tamil cannot be compared to Hindi, not because Hindi is superior to Tamil (I hold all languages in equal respect) but because it is much more widespread. Tamil is only spoken in Tamil Nadu, which has a population of 72 million. But Hindi is spoken not only in the Hindi belt, but in most non-Hindi states as a second language. In the Hindi belt there are 200 million people in Uttar Pradesh, 99 million in Bihar, 75 million in Madhya Pradesh, 69 million in Rajasthan, 27 million in Jharkhand, 26 million in Chhattisgarh, 26 million in Haryana, 20 million in Delhi and 7 million in Himachal Pradesh. Taking into account Hindi speakers in the non-Hindi belt in India (Punjab, West Bengal, Kashmir, Orissa, Assam and other North Eastern States,Telangana, etc), the number of Hindi speakers would be about 15 times that of Tamil speakers. Apart from that, Pakistanis (who number about 200 million and who call it Urdu ), Nepalis, Bangladeshis, Fijians, Mauretians, Surinamese, etc also speak Hindi.. How then can Tamil be compared with Hindi? Tamil is only a regional language, while Hindi is a national language. This is not because Hindi is superior to Tamil, but due to certain historical and social reasons.

 English is the link language only for the elite in India, and not for the common man. Anyone coming from Tamil Nadu to other parts of India will realise this. Without knowing Hindi he will experience great difficulty (in fact one of the Tamilian judges in the Supreme Court told me very recently that he had made a great mistake in not learning Hindi since he was finding it difficult in Delhi, but now he has started learning Hindi ). Only about five per cent of Indians know English (though I myself have appealed to people to learn English, since much of the knowledge of the world is in English, and I have strongly criticised those who say “ Angrezi Hatao (abolish English”). In fact Hindi is already the link language for Indians, even for many South Indians, as I had explained in my article.

 When I was Chief Justice of the Madras High Court, I once went to a shop in Madurai. To my surprise I heard the Tamilian shopkeeper speaking to someone on the telephone in Hindi. Since I had picked up some Tamil I said to him, “ Romba nalla Hindi pesreenga. Eppadi ? (You are speaking such good Hindi. How is that?”) He replied, “ Arasiyalle Hindi vendaamnu solvaanga, aanaa engalikkubusiness pananum. Adnaal kathukitten . (Politicians say that we do not want Hindi, but we have to do business. So I have learnt Hindi”). I think this shopkeeper had more sense than those who oppose Hindi.
 I dislike both Hindi haters as well as those who wish to impose Hindi on Tamil Nadu and other States. The issue should be considered rationally, instead of emotionally. No one can dispute that Tamil is a great language, with great literary works like Tirukkural, Silapathiharam, Manimekhalai, Kambar Ramayanam , and in more recent times, the great poems of the nationalist poet Subramania Bharathi and many others. I fully support the demand that lawyers in the Madras High Court should be allowed to argue in Tamil (except before judges who have come on a transfer from other States), though judgments should be in English so that people from other States can read them. When in the Supreme Court, I would sometimes speak a few sentences in Tamil when a Tamilian lawyer appeared before me. I think I was the first Judge in the history of the Supreme Court to speak in Tamil in court.

I would appeal to Tamilians to once again consider my suggestion that they should learn Hindi. If my suggestion does not make sense, please reject it.

Alexander the Great and the Indian philosophers
Today no doubt the Westerners are ahead of us in science and technology, and we have much to learn from them, which we should without having any ego problems. There is nothing wrong in being a disciple.
 However, there was a time when we were far ahead of the European countries in science and technology, philosophy, and in various other subjects.
 To give an example, most Europeans, like the French, Germans, English, etc were barbarians until Julius Caesar ( 100 B.C.-44 B.C. ) conquered them around 56 B.C. and brought them into the Roman world, where they were civilized.
 In contrast, India had civilizations long before Caesar's conquests. The Harappa Mohenjodaro ( Indus Valley ) civilization is estimated by some, e.g. Will Durant ( see his 'The Story of Civilization : Our Oriental Heritage ') to be the oldest in the world, of 4000-3000 B.C.
 I would like to give just one example in this connection.
  Alexander the Great invaded India in 326 B.C. Accounts of his invasion are contained in the Anabasis of Arrian, and in the works of Quintus Curtius Rufus, Diodorus Seculus and Plutarch.
  Alexander found many regions not under kings but  with democratic forms of government, e.g. the Mallavas, who were his fiercest opponents.
 Alexander was not only a great general, he was also a student of Aristotle, the great Greek philosopher, from whom he had imbibed a love for philosophy.
  In India Alexander found philosophers who were naked sadhus, and whom the Greeks called ' gymnosophists '. Possibly these were Digamber Jains or a sect of Buddhists. The Greek accounts mention ' Brachmanes ' ( probably  Brahmins ) and ' Shramanes ' ( probably Buddhist shramanas ).
 The military might of the West met the spiritual knowledge of the East, the overdressed met the underdressed.
  Among the Indian philosophers  mentioned by name in the historical accounts are Calanos ( Kalyan ) and Dandamis. Alexander's representative Onesicritus had discussions with many such philosophers, and related their conversations to Alexander.
 These India sages refused to go to meet Alexander when summoned by him, and refused gifts sent to them by him, saying that they had no need of what Alexander was sending them, because they were content with what they had.
  In Arrian's account, when Alexander went to meet Dandamis, the latter told him :
 " O King Alexander, each man possesses just so much of the earth as that on which he stands. You are a man like other men. But you are so restless and relentless that you are roaming all over the world far from your home, troubling yourself and troubling others. But soon you will die, and will possess only so much of the earth as suffices for your burial "

Cricket: The opium of the masses in India

Much is being publicized nowadays about Sachin Tendulkar's book.

In my opinion, cricket is one of the opiums of the masses in India ( the others being lives of film stars, reality shows, fashion parades, etc ).

The Roman Emperors used to say, if you cannot give the people bread, give them circuses. The French Queen Marie Antoinette put it slightly differently. In India it is, if you cannot give the people bread and employment give them cricket ( or the lives of Amitabh Bachchan, Kareena Kapoor, or other film stars ). Keep the people involved in cricket ( or film stars ) so that they forget their socio-economic plight.

What is important is not poverty, unemployment, malnutrition, lack of healthcare and good education, etc for the masses, what is important is whether India has beaten Bangladesh or New Zealand ( or better still, Pakistan ) in a cricket match, or whether a film star is having an affair.

Hari Om !