Ever since organized religion has existed in the world, people in different parts of the world have tried to establish the name by which they call God as greater than any other name used to call God. Those who use the same name as theirs come within the ‘We or Us’ circle. Those who use a different name are addressed as ‘They or Them’ and fall outside the ‘We’ circle.

Some say “Krishna is the greatest”, some say “Shiva is the greatest”, some say, “There is no God but Allah”, some say “Christ is the greatest”…

Those who call God by the names of Rama/Krishna/Vishnu, they call themselves Vaishnavas or Gaudya Vaishnavas (represented in ISKCON or Hare Krishna movement today that establishes Lord Krishna as supreme). Those who call God by the name of Shiva call themselves Shaivas. In India, if you go to Maharashtra, you’ll see people remembering God by the name of Ganesh. If you go to West Bengal, you will find people chanting the names Durga or Kali. In India and in other parts of the world, those who know the son of God by the name of Jesus Christ call themselves Christians (or Roman Catholics or Protestants, etc. when they disagree over various aspects). Similarly, those who do not recognize any other name for God apart from Allah call themselves Muslims (or Shias or Sunnis, a distinction established after the death of Prophet Mohammad when his followers couldn’t agree on whether the leadership after the great Prophet should be based on lineage or capability).

Remember God by any name (including those of Energy, Time, Consciousness, etc.), and He (or She if you see God in the female form) will manifest within you in that particular form [जाकी रही भावना जैसी प्रभु मूरति देखी तिन तैसी Jaaki rahi bhawna jaisi, Prabhu murat dekhi tin taisi “One sees God as per his/her feelings”, or “the form of God you see is a reflection of your thought process”, says Tulsidas in Ram Charit Manas]. Call God by any name you wish, s/he’ll present himself/herself in the image, form, symbol (or lack thereof) you wish to see.

In this beautiful video from the new Ramayan made by Sagar Arts and presented in the Indian channel ‘NDTV Imagine’, Lord Ram establishes that He is a bhakta or devotee of Lord Shiva (thus, He’s a Shaiva). On the other hand, Lord Shiva establishes that He is a devotee of Lord Rama (thus, He’s a Vaishnava). Thus, Lord Rama sings and plays the instrument in devotion of Lord Shiva. On the other hand, Lord Shiva dances in devotion of Lord Ram. Each is trying to please his Lord. Each is the devotee of the other. Each is the Lord of the other.

In Hindu scriptures, there are 18 puranas - each dedicated to a particular name for God - and each establishing that name as supreme. The Shiva purana establishes Lord Shiva as the greatest. The Vishnu purana establishes Lord Vishnu as the greatest. The Shrimad Bhagvad Purana establishes Lord Krishna as the greatest. Do you see a contradiction? There is a welcome contradiction. It has been done purposely so that the devotee can be free to choose the name/form of God s/he is most comfortable with, and also be assured that the name s/he is chanting is the greatest. Similarly, there is nothing wrong when we, as Christians, recognize the name Jesus Christ as the greatest or when we, as Muslims, recognize the name Allah as the greatest.

However, we should understand that while we have the right to call the name we know for God as greatest, other fellow human beings have the right to call the name they know for God as greatest. This essentially means that call Him (or Her, if you’re a feminist) by any name, we are all reaching out to the same God within us and outside us and all around us. Instead of fighting over which name is greater, devote yourself in realizing the name/form/words of the God you worship deep within you. If you’re a Hindu, be a good Hindu. If you’re a Muslim, be a good Muslim. If you’re a Christian, be a good Christian.

While it is perfectly fine to have your favorite name for God, don’t give your faiths a bad name by looking down at those in other faiths who address God by their own favorite name(s), or by having the misconception that those who address God by different names or try to reach him through different paths will go to hell. Observe the other path(s), go for a trek using the other path(s), meet and speak to people who’ve taken that way, read the guidebooks detailing those path(s) and you’ll find that it may be better or worse laid out, there might be more people treading them or less people treading them, but they too lead to the same peak up there! We are giving ourselves too much of credit when we think that there is only one superhighway leading to God and that anybody who is not on it will land up nowhere and that it is our moral duty to coerce them, beg them, pull them into the highway - even if the person was already on a well-paved road leading to the peak. If you really want to help the person, show him how to be a better driver or trekker on the road s/he already is, instead of trying to change his/her road to the peak.

When the missionary E. Stanley Jones had met with Mahatma Gandhi, he had asked him, “Mr. Gandhi, though you quote the words of Christ often, why is that you appear to so adamantly reject becoming his follower?” Gandhi had replied, “Oh, I don’t reject Christ. I love Christ. It’s just that so many of you Christians are so unlike Christ.” “If Christians would really live according to the teachings of Christ, as found in the Bible, all of India would be Christian today,” he added (Dibin Samuel, 14 Aug 2008, Mahatma Gandhi and Christianity, Christian Today).

On quest for conversion to Christianity, Gandhi’s message was that instead of preaching Christianity, if a Christian Missionary was to live his life in service as exemplified by Christ, the message would be better received…”live the life according to the light…. If, therefore, you go on serving people and ask them also to serve, they would understand. But you quote instead John 3:16 and ask them to believe it and that has no appeal to me, and I am sure people will not understand it.” “A rose does not need to preach. It simply spreads its fragrance. The fragrance is its own sermon…the fragrance of religious and spiritual life is much finer and subtler than that of the rose.” (Dibin Samuel, 14 Aug 2008, Mahatma Gandhi and Christianity, Christian Today).

For Martin Luther King: “Mahatma Gandhi was the first person in human history to lift the ethic of love of Jesus Christ, above mere interaction between individuals and make it into a powerful and effective social force on a large scale. If humanity is to progress, Gandhi is inescapable. We may ignore him at our own peril”. When an American churchman upbraided him for this he replied “It is ironic yet inescapably true that the greatest Christian of the modern world was a man who never embraced Christianity.” (Ambassador (Retd) Alan Nazareth, Gandhi and Christianity, mkgandhi.org)

“Ekam sat vipra bahauda vadanti” (There is but one REALITY, though the wise speak of it in many ways), declared the Rig Veda [I.164.46 ], the oldest scripture of the oldest living religion in the world. In the few millenniums since the Rig Veda, the human race is still struggling to understand this simple truth.

Thus, instead of trying to establish the supremacy of Krishna or Rama or Shiva or Allah or Christ, we should recognize that they are different ways to address the same God (who is all pervading and within each one of us and all around us). Our quest should be to realize this God within us - to remove the layer of dust that is covering our inner soul. As a Hindu and as an Indian, I can safely say that this is the essence of Hinduism. This is the essence of India!

हर मानव में छिपी हुई है दिव्य गुणों की आग
दिल से मर्म शिखा बस छू दो, तुरन्त उठेगी जाग

“Inside every human is hidden a fire of divine qualities
Simply touch the molten tip with all your heart, and it will immediately set ablaze”

So forget about establishing which name of God is the greatest! Go seek out the God inside you. Once you know that there is God within you, and that God can do anything, you’ll see that nothing is impossible! Go, outshine the stars!!

When I watched this beautiful video, was reminded of the great Rabindranath Tagore’s message through his song penned in 1905 when Bengal was to be partitioned:

Have tried to translate it in English with the help of Tagore’s English version and Nikhil Kulkarni’s blog, and the Hindi translation from the English one arrived at). The player below has the song in Kishore Kumar’s voice:

যদি তোর ডাক শুনে কেউ না আসে তবে একলা চলো রে। (2)
Jodi tor đak shune keu na ashe tôbe êkla chôlo re, (2)
जोदी तोर डाक शुने केउ ना आशे तॉबे एख्ला चॉलो रे (2)
(यदि तोरी डाक सुनके कोई ना आए तब अकेले चलो रे
If they answer not to your call walk alone)

তবে একলা চলো, একলা চলো, একলা চলো, একলা চলো রে॥ (2)
tôbe Êkla chôlo, êkla chôlo, êkla chôlo, êkla chôlo re. (2)
तॉबे एख्ला चॉलो, एख्ला चॉलो, एख्ला चॉलो, एख्ला चॉलो रे (2)
(अकेले चलो, अकेले चलो, अकेले चलो, अकेले चलो रे
walk alone, walk alone, walk alone, O walk alone)

যদি তোর ডাক শুনে কেউ না আসে তবে একলা চলো রে।
Jodi tor đak shune keu na ashe tôbe êkla chôlo re,
जोदी तोर डाक शुने केउ ना आशे तॉबे एख्ला चॉलो रे
(यदि तोरी डाक सुनके कोई ना आए तब अकेले चलो रे
If they answer not to your call walk alone)

যদি কেউ কথা না কয়, ওরে ওরে ও অভাগা,
Jodi keu kôtha na kôe, ore ore o ôbhaga,
जोदी केउ कॉथा ना कोए, ओरे ओरे ओ अभागा
(यदि कोई बात ना करे, अरे अरे ओ अभागा
if no one speaks to you, O you unlucky one)

যদি সবাই থাকে মুখ ফিরায়ে সবাই করে ভয়—
Jodi shôbai thake mukh firaee shôbai kôre bhôe—
जोदी शॉबाय थाके मूख फिराए शॉबाय कोरे भॉय (2)
(यदि सभी तोसे मुह फिराए सबको हो भय
if they are afraid and cower mutely facing the wall,)

তবে পরান খুলে
Tôbe pôran khule
तॉबे पॉरान खूले
(तब पूरे मन से
then wholeheartedly)

ও তুই মুখ ফুটে তোর মনের কথা একলা বলো রে॥
O tui mukh fuţe tor moner kôtha êkla bôlo re.
ओ तूई मूख़ फूटे तोर मोनेर कॉथा एख्ला बॉलो रे (2)
(ओ तू मुह खोल के तेरे मन की गाथा अकेले बोल रे
open what’s in your mind and speak up alone.)

যদি তোর ডাক শুনে কেউ না আসে তবে একলা চলো রে।
Jodi tor đak shune keu na ashe tôbe êkla chôlo re,
जोदी तोर डाक शुने केउ ना आशे तॉबे एख्ला चॉलो रे
(यदि तोरी डाक सुनके कोई ना आए तब अकेले चलो रे
If they answer not to your call walk alone)

যদি সবাই ফিরে যায়, ওরে ওরে ও অভাগা,
Jodi shôbai fire jae, ore ore o ôbhaga,
जोदी शॉबाय फिरे जाय, ओरे ओरे ओ अभागा
(यदि सब फ़िर जाएँ, अरे अरे ओ अभागा
if everyone turns away, O you unlucky one)

যদি গহন পথে যাবার কালে কেউ ফিরে না চায়—
Jodi gôhon pôthe jabar kale keu fire na chae—
जोदी गॉहोन पॉथे जबॉर काले केउ फिरे ना चाए (2)
(यदि गहन पथ में तेरे साथ कोई फिरना न चाहे 
If they turn away, and desert you when crossing the wilderness)

তবে পথের কাঁটা
Tôbe pôther kãţa
तॉबे पॉथेर काँटा
(तब पथ के कांटे
then the thorns on your path)

ও তুই রক্তমাখা চরণতলে একলা দলো রে॥
O tui rôktomakha chôrontôle êkla dôlo re.
ओ तूई रॉक्तोमाखा चॉरोनतॉले एख्ला डॉलो रे (2)
(ओ तू रक्त सने चरण तले दे के अकेले डोल रे
O you trample them under your feet and travel alone with your blood-soaked feet)

যদি তোর ডাক শুনে কেউ না আসে তবে একলা চলো রে।
Jodi tor đak shune keu na ashe tôbe êkla chôlo re,
जोदी तोर डाक शुने केउ ना आशे तॉबे एख्ला चॉलो रे
(यदि तोरी डाक सुनके कोई ना आए तब अकेले चलो रे
If they answer not to your call walk alone)

যদি আলো না ধরে, ওরে ওরে ও অভাগা,
Jodi alo na dhôre, ore ore o ôbhaga,
जोदी आलो ना धॉरे, ओरे ओरे ओ अभागा
(यदि दिया न जलाये, अरे अरे ओ अभागा
If they do not hold up the light, O you unlucky one)

যদি ঝড়-বাদলে আঁধার রাতে দুয়ার দেয় ঘরে—
Jodi jhôŗ-badole ãdhar rate duar dêe ghôre—
जोदी झॉड़-बादोले आधार राते दुआर दऐई घॉरे (2)
(यदि घोर बादल में आधी रात में रौशनी दूर हो घर की
When its the middle of the night with stormy winds and clouds, and the light of your house is far)

তবে বজ্রানলে 
Tôbe bojranôle
तॉबे बोज्रनॉले
(तब दुःख की वज्र ज्योति से
then with the thunder flame of pain)

আপন বুকের পাঁজর জ্বালিয়ে নিয়ে একলা জ্বলো রে॥
Apon buker pãjor jalie nie êkla jôlo re.
आपोन बुकेर पाजोर जालीये नीये एख्ला जॉलो रे (2)
(अपने मन में ज्योत जला के अकेले जलो रे
ignite your own heart and let it burn alone)

যদি তোর ডাক শুনে কেউ না আসে তবে একলা চলো রে।
Jodi tor đak shune keu na ashe tôbe êkla chôlo re,
जोदी तोर डाक शुने केउ ना आशे तॉबे एख्ला चॉलो रे
(यदि तोरी डाक सुनके कोई ना आए तब अकेले चलो रे
If they answer not to your call walk alone)

The mouth-organ piece with the soul of the song well preserved:

Sometime more than a week ago, Amitabh Bachchan decided to utilize a new medium for making his stand clear on things - where his words are not filtered through the press. He started his personal blog.

Recent media reports targeting him for his supposed lack of contribution to Maharashtra had disturbed me to an extent…not so much for him in particular, but for the state of affairs in our country where caste and regional identities are repeatedly made to come out stronger than our national identity or basic humanity.  I decided to write to him, voicing my thoughts on this issue, and about the ways in which I had known him. I was glad to see his response to me the next day. Was happy to note that of the 578 comments he received on that single day, my name was on top in his response. I had managed to convey my thoughts to Amitabh the person and not the star.

Given below are his response and my entry. In the following days, I responded to him on two other occassions as well (but that will make for another entry some day..or they may lie buried in the sea of comments that have started flooding his blog, which, as per a Rediff piece, "may still take a while before".."reach[ing] the huge number Aamir Khan gets for his blog").

Amitabh’s response to my comments on the night of April 19, 2008,

"Naresh Agarwal from Singapore did a huge page and description of his links with my films and my issues and i thank him for his views and his strong support."

Copied below is what I had written:

Naresh Kumar Agarwal Says:
April 19th, 2008 at 9:42 pm

Singapore 19 April 2008

Dear Mr Bachchan / Amit ji / Amit Uncle,

Haven’t ever thought of addressing you in any particular way, but this is an opportunity. Perhaps I’d go for Amit ji. It is not too professional in a western sense, preserves your individuality with no reference to age, is worthy of my Indian and family values, and is respectful of your stature.

A BRIEF BACKGROUND: I’m a 31-year old Indian, based in Singapore for the past 13 years. Hailing from my beautiful Sikkim, I’ve studied and excelled in the most prestigious school in Sikkim, Tashi Namgyal Academy. In 1995, I won a 100% scholarship for undergraduate education in Singapore. Got my Computer Engineering degree and worked for a few years in the IT industry. Am currently pursuing a PhD in Information Systems at the National University of Singapore. Will move to US for an Academic career once I finish. Hope to make a lot of difference to India and the world during my lifetime. More details here.

Growing up in Sikkim in the 1980s, you were ‘Amitabachan’ in my mind as a child. I remember watching ‘Coolie’ (the song..saari duniya ka bojh hum uthaate hain..), flashes of barbed wire on your forehead in Desh Premee (and I turned my head away to avoid seeing your pain), how I wanted to watch Mahaan because you had a triple role..and Kaalia (still haven’t watched both the movies). Everyone used to say Sholay is superhit. When I watched it as a child, I didn’t like the violence and didn’t understand why it was so great. Didn’t like to see the sadness in Jaya Bhaduri in the white saree of a widow.

As I grew up and understood the meaning of life and people, I stopped being in awe of filmstars. Understood that they’re just doing their job the way I am. No point putting them on a pedestal or pulling them down. The only personality I’m still in awe of is Lata Mangeshkar. That’s because she has especially been blessed by God to heal millions with the divinity in her voice. My ideal in life is Mahatma Gandhi..again, not because he was so great or extraordinary, but precisely because he was as ordinary as I am or you are (don’t mean to pull you down by putting ‘you’ here, but am talking on a human level). It was his staunch belief in Truth and in himself that made him extraordinary. That we do a disservice to him by putting him on a pedestal. My motto in life is ‘Let your inner spark ‘glow’..you and I could be the next Gandhi.’ You can read more on my thougts about life here.

One of my hobbies has been painting (oil/watercolor) and sketching. In 2001, I made a pencil sketch of yours as a gift to a friend who was a die-hard fan of yours. You can see the sketch here.

 

For some time, I worked as a software engineer with a digital cinema company which was setting up digital cinema servers in theatres in India in partnership with Mr Manmohan Shetty/Adlabs. Hrithik Roshan had invited you and other film personalities for a premiere at Adlabs. I was in that theatre, watching you all from a balcony right above your heads, along with another friend (at one point, Hrithik Roshan looked up, and must have wondered who this guy is or what is he doing here). The friend with me was saying, ‘Ab dekhna. Aise gale milenge jaise bachpan se langotia yaar ho. Peeth peeche burai karenge.’ Not sure about that, but what I noticed was the way you all met was just what happens in any of the parties I’ve attended or any youngster attends today…normal Hi’s and hugs. Yes, majority are social acquaintances, some close friends perhaps. Something which struck me about you was your sense of punctuality. You came in and sat on a chair towards the back when the theatre was empty - the first person to come in. If I remember correctly, you were wearing long kurta-pyjamas. You stood up and greeted graciously, the people who came to meet you. Bipasha Basu came and introduced her mother to you. She mentioned how she’s a big fan of yours. There was Rani, Perizad Zorabien, Aamir Khan with a big moustache for Mangal Pandey, and various others.

In recent years, I have felt that celebrities don’t do enough to make a difference to the society around them, given the amount of adulation and reach you people have. Yes, there are the charity functions and endorsement to campaigns. But it usually ends there (Lata Mangeshkar’s hospital, your starting a school in UP, Sanjay Dutt’s work for charities, Sushmita Sen’s adopting a child and Shabana Azmi’s unrelenting fights, among others, are welcome exceptions). Celebrities are too busy doing their jobs (getting films and acting in them, struggling with the press for the quotes and the misquotes, zealously guarding your family from prying eyes, and, at the end of the day, just trying to lead a normal life). It takes courage for a Bhaichung Bhutia to stand up and say that he won’t run with the Olympic torch in support of the Tibetans, or for an Aamir Khan to take a stand against attending Award Functions. Your biggest act of courage, I feel, has been the way you quietly fought back and resurrected yourself after everyone was raving to pull you down since your first stint as superstar. You’re open to learning new methods and from youngsters. This openness is what keeps you in the news and the public memory - that you were willing to still compete and not just bask in your past glory. Your presence in this blog today is testimony to that.

Coming to the politics over your contribution to Maharashtra, here are my thoughts. We all know the whole issue is political and nothing else. Politicians are ready to trade the essential values of our country and constitution just to establish their hold on power. Our anthemma is that our regional and caste identities are stronger than our national identiy. That said, immigration is always a major issue with countries. In our case, with Mumbai and Delhi, its happening within the same country and cannot be termed immigration. Our constitution provides every Indian a right to move, work and settle anywhere in the country. What Mumbaikars need to understand is that however difficult it may seem, the countries that have done exceedingly well in the long run are those that have welcomed immigration - case in point Singapore and the United States. Singapore has done so well, and was able to move from the third world to the first world, was because it welcomed foreign talent from all over - from India, China, and other countries (even though it meant more competition for jobs for the local population). In the long run, it helped in creating more jobs for the local population, and helped increased their skill levels. Mumbai is what it is today because of its assimilation of people from all over and of all kinds. This is the idea of India, of Hinduism, and of democracy. Anybody who doesn’t understand is living in a fool’s world, and is a person who doesn’t believe in his or her own abilities and in God. S/he is just seeking an easy way out and doesn’t want to earn his/her bread.

The big question! Has Amitabh Bachchan done enough for Maharashtra? Has Amitabh Bachchan done enough for any other parts of India..for India as a whole..or for humanity? In his own way, Yes! By being himself, Yes! Did it have a big impact - Yes! Has he done enough in the way other people would have liked - Perhaps No. But 1) why should he? As he himself says, he’s a public figure, not a public official. 2) Why should he be singled out..if he’s not done enough..celebrities as a whole perhaps have not done enough..perhaps a Sachin Tendulkar, a Shah Rukh Khan, perhaps even a Lata Mangeshkar..How much has Madhuri Dikshit, a Marathi/Maharashtrian done for Maharashtra? Should she be doing more? May be/May be not. 3) And why single out celebrities? What about the politicians? How much has Raj Thackrey done for Maharashtra? What about people from other professions? The so called ‘aam-aadmi’ or the ‘common’ man.

Before anybody in Maharashtra gets the right to demand, ‘How much has Amitabh Bachchan done for Maharashtra?’ a question every Maharashtran must be asking is, ‘How much have ‘I’ done for Maharashtra?’ ‘How much have ‘I’ done for India?’ If the aam-aadmi is struggling in his day to day life, so is Amitabh Bachchan, in his own way. That’s because it is the way life is, difficult by its very nature. It doesn’t differentiate between an Amitabh Bachchan, a Raj Thakarey, a Mahatma Gandhi, a Lata Mangeshkar, a Mayawati, or an aam-aadmi in giving his/her share of difficulties. While we don’t have choice over our circumstances or conditions, we do have the choice over how we react to our circumstances. And this is what makes all the difference. This is what made Mohandas into Mahatma Gandhi - not because he was any more privileged than the rest or life was any easier for him.

Regarding the construction of your school in UP…If Maharashtrians feel that that uneducated people from Uttar Pradesh flocking into Maharashtra are doing harm to the State, then the biggest service anyone can do to Maharashtra is by creating conditions in Uttar Pradesh whereby poor people don’t need to leave the state in the first place. A prerequisite is education. Amitabh Bachchan, by starting a school in Uttar Pradesh, has thus, done the biggest service to Maharashtra. If more and more good quality schools are constructed in UP and Bihar, it will do Mumbai and Maharashtra good in the long run. If this doesn’t make sense to a reader, he should try and think why our Central Government, despite our difficult relations with Pakistan, says that a happy and prosperous Pakistan is in the best interests of India.

I’m sure you didn’t really need to know all my thoughts..they may or may not have any importance..I may not appear to be an adulating fan (though I respect your body of work and enjoy a lot of your movies; you’re the best of what we have in any case)..but now that you’ve decided to reach out directly to people, I thought it was time for me to reach out directly to you.

I’d be glad if you let me know your thoughts on what I’ve said. You may reply either through this blog or directly to me on my email.

Warm regards,

A fellow Indian,
Naresh Agarwal

Wesbite: http://www.comp.nus.edu.sg/~naresh
Blog: http://naresh.blogsome.com

On 10 April 2008, the Supreme Court of India upheld a law which provides for 27 percent reservation for the Socially and Educationally backward ‘castes’ of India (many communities have fought and are fighting to get their surname recognized as an OBC surname), termed OBCs, in premier educational institutions supported by Central Government, which includes the IITs, IIMs and AIIMS. This ruling takes the quota of reserved seats in India’s premier higher education institutes to 49.5%. In a balanced judgment, the creamy layer (or the rich) among the OBCs were excluded from the reservation. Government jobs already have had quotas implemented. Many political parties want to extend the quota and reservation to the private sector as well - which could mean that all MNCs coming to India may be expected to provide reservations based on the family name of the applicant.

Indian society, since ages, had been divided into 4 major ‘varnas’ or classes. These included, from the higest to the lowest - the Brahmin (the priest or the teacher or the scholar or the advisor), the Kshatriya (the warrior or the ruler or the king), the Vaishya (the trader, the businessman, the professional) and the Shudra (the lowest caste - service-providing groups, some artisan groups).

"The Manu Smriti claims that by the time it was written, Hindu society included another class (untouchables) of people without a position in any of the four Varnas and therefore associated with the lowest of the jobs. The upper classes, who were supposed to maintain ritual and corporal purity, came to regard them as untouchables. The people of this "fifth varna" are now called Dalits (the oppressed) or Harijans; they were formerly known as "untouchables" or "pariahs". However, this last addition social strata is not a part of the religion of Hinduism. Hinduism only categorizes occupations in to four categories" (Wikipedia - Varna in Hinduism).

The caste system was first introduced in India to promote division of labour as per one’s expertise. It was not supposed to be hereditary.

‘It is very clear that in the early Vedic times, the Varna system (if at all it existed) meant classes with free mobility of jobs and intermarriage’ (Wikipedia - Varna in Hinduism). One hymn of the Rig Veda states:

कारुरहं ततो भिषगुपलप्रक्षिणी नना । (RV 9.112.3)
"I am a bard, my father is a physician, my mother’s job is to grind the corn……"

The highest classes, in order to protect their status and their children, refused to let go and slowly people started identifying castes with their family name. The thousands of surnames attached to people’s names in India can roughly be slotted into any of the four varnas. ‘Offsprings of differnent ‘varnas’ belong to different ‘Jatis’ [or castes]’ (Wikipedia - Caste System in India). With independence in 1947, and a constitution providing equality for all, people started growing and developing irrespective of their castes. In KR Narayanan, India had its first Dalit president - a person of the lowest caste occupying the highest office of the land. Still social injustice prevails at various levels, especially in the villages. The rich and the poor in modern India can no longer be classified on the basis of the castes. There are rich Brahmins, and the poorest of Brahmins (no better than beggars, hoping for every person to give them 1-rupee for appying ’tilak’ or a red dot on a person’s forehead), the rich Kshatriyas and the poor Kshatriyas (in a democracy, monarchs anyways lost their traditional rights to rule on the basis of birth), the rich Vaishyas and the poor Vaishyas, and also the rich Shudras and the poor Shudras.

In 1947, reservation was provided to the lowest classes, to help in their social upliftment. It was intended to be for a period of 10 years, and slowly done away with. The vote bank politics of a democracy ensured that successive governments only increased the quantum of quota and spread the reservation/quota net far and wide (with more and more people clamouring for quota and reservation). Now, after 60 years of India’s independence, this reservation has increased to close to 50%.

The justification is a politics of revenge. It is way of fighting historical inequality not be providing equal opportunity to all or affirmative action on the basis of one’s financial condition (but making surname a criterion for admission into universities). It is like trying to fight dowry not by making it illegal, but by making it mandatory for the groom’s family to pay hefty amounts to the bride’s family (as a means to avenge historical wrongs where the bride’s family has to suffer due to demands from the groom’s family).

So looking to the future in a 21st century India (the largest democracy in the world and one of its fastest growing economies), the caste system of India has been hailed. The division in society has been kept, maintained, solidified and institutionalized. Only the order has been reversed. This is the new order:

1) Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (SCs/STs) - highest caste (The new Brahmins)

2) The Other Backward Classes (OBCs) (without creamy layer) - the ruling class (The new Kshatriyas)

3) OBCs with creamy layer - the new Vaishyas (they may fight to be counted amongst the ruling class)

4) The General or Forward Class (people in India having surnames signifying higher caste) - the new Shudras (they will either suffer or flee to foreign lands and foreign Universities).

Their is no point lamenting over ‘brain drain’. It has been institutionalized!

I read about the killing of Benazir Bhutto 15 minutes ago (Thu 27 Dec, 10:30am New York Time, 9:30pm in India). I’m shocked and shuddering. My feet were cold and I was delaying wearing thick socks for a while. Not sure whether it was the temperature or the news - I actually shivered on reading about Benazir Bhutto’s assassination. Somehow, it doesn’t feel like a news story on somebody’s passing which they cover in detail in the media - from the Nepal royals to Pramod Mahajan to Teji Bachchan.

I was shocked, angry and sad..it was as if I had some personal hope for Pakistan from Benazir that I hadn’t realized. I don’t remember a moment so personally shocking since the killing of Rajiv Gandhi. When Rajiv Gandhi was killed - there was this feeling..how can they do this…how can they kill the most charismatic leader of India…weren’t they satisfied having witnessed the deaths of Indira and Sanjay Gandhi…how can you make a single family suffer so much….what will happen to India..that was May 1991..

And now…end of 2007…I am overcome with the same thoughts…how can they make a particular family suffer so much…Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the sons Murtaza Bhutto, Shahnawaz Bhutto and now..Benazir herself…with all her imperfections….Pakistan was witnessing a change…what will happen to Pakistan…what will happen to the world…is there any hope? You might disagree with her..but how can you kill her?

Suddenly the moments when I read her autobiography ‘Daughter of the East’ during my school days in Gangtok all flashed before my eyes…the way her mother taught her to count a no. of times to make sure her teeth are brushed and clean…the recent interviews on ibnlive.com that I watched where Karan Thapar interviewed her on Devil’s Advocate…all the news of her intent to return to Pakistan…her return..assassination bid…threats to her life…flashes of names..her husband Asif Ali Zardari…her mother Nusrat Bhutto…her niece…Fatima Bhutto…Murtaza’s daughter…who hates Benazir..I think she’d be sad and crying too…sad for the Bhutto family, despite her disagreements with Benazir…

As the news is slowly sinking in, I think it’s a sad day for Pakistan..for India..for the world…it brings to the fore an ongoing war - between the fundamentalists and uncivilized people (who do not know how to disagree without violence)..and the normal world as we know it ..or think it is…Perhaps the world is not what it seems…it seems like a very dangerous world…anybody who wants to do something gets killed… Is there hope? There must be…images of Mahatma Gandhi lying dead flash….there can only be hope in non-violence…when people learn to disagree through non-violent means…

On Sep 22, the Society for South Asian Studies, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, National University of Singapore organized a movie screening of "Rang De Basanti" at LT29. I was one of the participants who had to provide a critique based on the theme, "Do you support the actions taken by the lead actors?". The theme was given out before the movie started. The audio quality in the LT (Lecture Theatre) was excellent. Apart from the obvious young Indian crowd, a couple of local Chinese and Caucasian faces were also to be seen. Though watching it for the second time, I loved every moment of the movie, as I made my notes on what to speak. It was an excellent audience too, with a palpable vibrancy in the air that suggested each person watching was really proud of the movie (as if having a personal stake) and was enjoying every moment of it - something one rarely gets to see in a movie theatre. There were bits of verbal interaction as well. When a dejected DJ (with a stress on D..DDDDJ..Aamir Khan) says he doesn’t know what to do, I heard a voice behind me say "NUS mein aa kar research kar le" (come to NUS and pursue research). I laughed and cried with the movie. When DJ lights the funeral pyre of his pilot friend, I imagined my cousin Sanjay doing the same in Jalpaiguri that day, who lost his father (my mousaji - Bidya mousi’s husband) a day before. When the movie ended, it witnessed a standing ovation from all present. The organizers announced that refreshments would be served outside, but only after the critique competition was over. The students (mostly) sat back and watched. Each speaker was to be given 3 minutes to present the critique, followed by 2 minutes of Q&A. Two out of the first three speakers presented arguments saying they did not support the actions taken by the lead actors. One girl said when DJ and his friends reach the radio station, they should not have pointed guns against innocent people. On being questioned if they’d have been allowed to go and disrupt a large radio station without using guns, she said, perhaps they could have pointed guns to the security guard but not to the people inside. The response from the audience was lukewarm. One speaker said he was confused as to whether they did the right thing or not. Then came a fourth speaker, who went forth and declared, "I totally support the actions taken by the lead actors. I am no Gandhi fan…and this is the only way which actually works". He went on to say how non-violence didn’t work in the recent protests by medical students against reservations at premier Indian educational institutions. The audience clapped and cheered. I was the last speaker. Following is a gist of what I said:

My name is Naresh Kumar Agarwal and I am a Research Assistant and a 2nd year PhD Candidate at the Dept. of Information Systems, School of Computing. To answer whether I support the actions taken by the lead actors, I’d say that I totally support the actions taken by the lead actors in the movie, but to say whether you or I should do the same, I’d say "No". When I first watched the movie, and having been inspired by Mahatma Gandhi all along, I went through a dilemma whether the method advocated in the movie was correct. Mahatma Gandhi has said, "Be the change you want to see in the world". After much thought, I concluded that Rang de Basanti does not advocate the method, but rather, the courage to take on the responsibility for bringing about change, to take responsibility for the state of things in your country rather than simply blaming the other, to question and resist injustice, to follow the truth. Mahatma Gandhi has said that there are three possible responses to oppression and injustice: First is the coward’s way - to accept the wrong or to run away from it. Second possible response is to stand and fight by force of arms. Gandhi said this was better than acceptance or running away. So in the movie, given the option of not doing anything against injustice versus seeking redemption through the violent way, I’d say the violent way is preferable. But the third and the best method of all, and one which requires the most courage, is to stand and fight solely by non-violent means. In this non-violent method, violence is present, but it is not directed against the other person, only to yourself. The actors in RDB also went on a candle-light vigil to India Gate in a non-violent manner. Only when it didn’t work did they adopt violence. The lesson to imbibe from the movie is not voilence, but rather the responsibility to bring about change (instead of cowardly accepting or running away from the state of things). The following is inscribed on a tomb in Westminister Abbey "When I was young and free and my imagination had no limits, I dreamt of changing the world. As I grew older and wiser, I discovered the world would not change, so I shortened my sights somewhat and decided to change only my country. But it, too, seemed immovable. As I grew into my twilight years, in one last desperate attempt, I settled for changing my family, those closest to me, but alas, they would have none of it. And now, as I lie on my deathbed, I suddenly realize: If I had only changed myself first, then by example I would have changed my family. From their inspiration and encouragement, I would then have been able to better my country, and who knows, I may have even changed the world." The biggest message of RDB is to be able to change youself. And for this, you don’t really require violence, but rather, compassion for those around you. HH the Dalai Lama has said, "To experience genuine compassion is to develop a feeling of closeness to others combined with a sense of responsibility for their welfare. This develops when we accept that other people are just like ourselves in wanting happiness and not wanting suffering." (I didn’t say the Dalai Lama quote in the actual speech). A previous speaker mentioned that the actors used a personal loss as pretext to rise up against injustice, which she said is not correct. I disagree. One spark is enough to bring about change in a person - "Aag hai mujhmein kahin". That spark could be anything, if a personal loss helps you bring out the fire in you, so be it. If watching this movie helps spark the fire within, why not! So while we go out and do what we do - pursue research, strive to rise in our jobs, whether we are in our country or outside it, when we spend lifetimes wanting to go and buy the next car, that condo out there, and worrying about me, myself, my spouse and my children, let us strive to do something worthwhile for our country. "Ab bhi jiska khoon na khoula, wo khoon nahin hai paani hai. Jo bhi desh ke kaam na aaye, wo bekar jawaani hai"! (Translation, not mentioned in speech: even now if someone’s blood does not boil, that is not blood but water. Anybody who does nothing for his/her country, that is a wasted youth).

During the Q&A session, somebody asked me, "So do you believe in Mahatma Gandhi or in Rang de Basanti". I replied,

"I believe in Mahatma Gandhi and I believe in Rang de Basanti. And I see no contradiction."

The first four consolation prizes announced didn’t include my name. I was declared the Winner.

I am angry. No, I am very angry. I don’t get angry easily. But this time, I really am. For the first time in my 11 years outside India, I question whether I am indeed fortunate to be outside? Whether it is at all worthwhile to go back to the muck and dirt? I am not referring to the dirt on the roads - which can be cleansed. I am talking about the dirty minds of power hungry leaders who are collaborating the sunset of all things good in India. With ALL political parties unopposed to reservations, with our economist prime minister silent/supportive of the issue, with our scientist president appealing Medical students to call off their strike - it appears to be death bed of all hope of India rising, of India actually shining. If such qualified people were not at the helm of affairs in our Parliament, there would have been a potential to blame. It is precisely the inability of good, qualified people to fight the murkiness of vote-bank politics that is seeing the death of meritocracy in India. The implementation of 50% reservation for the elite "OBC - other backward classes" section of Indian students in India’s premier educational institutions, while leaving deserving students from other sections to scramble for seats has the danger of: - Bringing down the quality of education and hence the name of these instituitions - Furthering the caste divide in India - Power hungry politicians dividing and ruling the masses - … Mourn…its time for condolences…for hope for a better India lies in the death-bed, betrayed by its best "Et tu Manmohan, then fall India"!

Even since there has been renewed talk of increased reservation for other backward classes in premier Indian educational institutions, there has been an intense debate going on. In my view, it is hardly a matter of debate - just a matter of populist measures trying to cure the symptoms rather than the disease, and garner more votes in the process. On the one hand, India is slowly but surely finding its rightful place in top league, with its economy doing well and people in general being able to afford more. This should be a catalyst for the political spectrum to try and change old mindsets - to make people take more responsibility for their lives and their country - and get away with the ‘chalta hai’ attitude. But no, the very man who has inititated economic reforms in India heads an executive that now wants to turn our educational institutions into symbols of mediocrity where you are judged not based on your merit but the surname that goes behind your name. If affirmative action is required to pull people along, provide them free training/coaching - help them to compete, instead of turning them into second-class citizens with a carrot of special privileges. Continue reading for a counter-argument as to why reservation should be supported (expressed by somebody in a Rediff message board):

"I think we should have job reservations in all the fields. I completely support the PM and all the politicians for promoting this. Let’s start the reservation with our cricket team. We should have 10 percent reservation for Muslims. 30 percent for OBC, SC/ST like that. Cricket rules should be modified accordingly. The boundary circle should be reduced for an SC/ST player. The four hit by an OBC player should be considered as a six and a six hit by a OBC player should be counted as 8 runs. An OBC player scoring 60 runs should be declared as a century. We should influence ICC and make rules so that the pace bowlers like Shoaib Akhtar should not bowl fast balls to our OBC player. Bowlers should bowl maximum speed of 80 kilometer per hour to an OBC player. Any delivery above this speed should be made illegal. Also we should have reservation in Olympics. In the 100 meters race, an OBC player should be given a gold medal if he runs 80 meters."

I’m sure most of us would agree on these recommendations for reservations The only ‘reservation’ I have is that the list could have been longer!

On Mar 3, 2006, President George Bush of America made a speech on the grounds of Purana Qila in Delhi (built by Sher Sha Suri and used by Humayun) - a day after signing a historic accord for civilian nuclear cooperation with India. Here, I quote parts of the speech which I thought were very well worded (source: The White House)

"Over the past two days we’ve been grateful for your kind reception, touched by your warm hospitality, and dazzled by this vibrant and exciting land. I appreciate the opportunity to speak to the Indian people. I’m honored to bring the good wishes and the respect of the world’s oldest democracy to the world’s largest democracy. Tonight we stand on the ruins of an ancient city that was the capital of an Indian kingdom thousands of years ago. Today it is part of a modern Asian city that is the capital of one of the world’s great nations. At the heart of a civilization that helped give the world mathematics, cutting-edge businesses now give us the technology of tomorrow. In the birthplace of great religions, a billion souls of varied faiths now live side-by-side in freedom and peace. When you come to India in the 21st century, you’re inspired by the past, and you can see the future. India in the 21st century is a natural partner of the United States because we are brothers in the cause of human liberty. Yesterday, I visited a memorial to Mahatma Gandhi, and read the peaceful words of a fearless man. His words are familiar in my country because they helped move a generation of Americans to overcome the injustice of racial segregation. When Martin Luther King arrived in Delhi in 1959, he said, ‘To other countries, I may go as a tourist, but to India, I come as a pilgrim.’ I come to India as a friend." "The partnership between the United States and India has deep and sturdy roots in the values we share. Both our nations were founded on the conviction that all people are created equal and are endowed with certain fundamental rights, including freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion. Those freedoms are enshrined in law through our written constitutions, and they are upheld daily by institutions common to both our democracies — an elected legislature, an independent judiciary, a loyal political opposition, and, as I know well here in India, a lively free press. " "your economy has more than doubled in size since you opened up your markets in 1991. You’ve dramatically raised the living standards of your citizens. India’s middle class now numbers 300 million people, more than the entire population of the United States." "When your Prime Minister addressed the United States Congress, he said this: ‘We must fight terrorism wherever it exists, because terrorism anywhere threatens democracy everywhere.’ He is right. And so America and India are allies in the war against terror." "India has a Hindu majority, and one of the world’s largest Muslim populations. India is also home to millions of Sikhs and Christians and other religious groups. All worship freely in temples and mosques and churches all across this great land. Indians of diverse backgrounds attend school together and work together and govern your nation together. As a multi-ethnic, multi-religious democracy, India is showing the world that the best way to ensure fairness and tolerance is to establish the rule of law. The best way to counter resentment is to allow peaceful expression. The best way to honor human dignity is to protect human rights. For every nation divided by race, religion or culture, India offers a hopeful path: If justice is the goal, then democracy is the way." "The world has benefitted from the example of India’s democracy, and now the world needs India’s leadership in freedom’s cause. As a global power, India has an historic duty to support democracy around the world." "In a few days, I’ll return to America, and I will never forget my time here in India. America is proud to call your democracy a friend. We’re optimistic about your future. The great Indian poet Tagore once wrote, ‘There’s only one history — the history of man.’ The United States and India go forward with faith in those words. There’s only one history of man — and it leads to freedom. May God bless India. "

Thought I’ll let the picture speak for today. A morning view of the Kanchenjunga range, captured on 27 Dec ‘05 when Sanjog drove Archana and me to Ganesh Tok, Tashi View Point and the site of the school he is working on.

After hearing and reading great reviews about it, Archana and I decided to steal time to watch ‘Rang De Basanti’ yesterday. The movie is unlike any other movie I’ve seen so far - I’m sure it will be counted among the landmark movies. The performances, one-liners, characters, the artistic feel were all excellent. The lines were real and funny: "yaar mera haath dekh kar bata na..love line kaisi hai"…"teri love line hai hi nahin…lagta hai bachpan mein chooran ke saath chat ke khaa gaya" "Ik pair future mein te ik pair past mein rakh ke aaj par moot rahe" (With one leg in the past and the other in the future we are peeing on the present) Reminded me of the funny lines in the 1997 Jack Nicholson movie, "As Good as it Gets". But above all, its the message of the movie which has perhaps made the most impact in the minds of those who have watched it. Felt my eyes swell up with tears as Atul Kulkarni recited Ram Prasad Bismil’s lines:

Sar faroshi ki tamanna ab hamaare dil mein hai, Dekhna hai zor kitna baazoo-e-qaatil main hai! Rahrav-e-raah-e-mohabbat reh na jaana raah mein, Lazzat-e-sahraa nawardi doori-e-manzil mein hai. Yoon khada maqtal mein qaatil keh raha hai baar baar, Kya tamanna-e-shahaadat bhi kisi ke dil mein hai Waqt aane par bataa dengey tujhe ai aasmaan, Hum abhi se kya bataayein kya hamaarey dil mein hai. Ae shaheed-e-mulk-o-millat terey jazbon par nissar, Teri qurbaani ka charcha ghair ki mehfil mein hai. Kheench kar laai hai sabko qatla hone ki ummeed, Aashiqon ka aaj jamghat kooncha-e-qaatil mein hai. Ek se karta nahin koi doosra koi bhi baat, Dekhta hoon main jise woh chup teri mehfil mein hai. [We are now raring to die for our country’s sake Let’s see how much of strength the assassin can display! O traveller on the path of love, do not drop mid-way, It is the distance of the goal that glorifies the chase. Standing by the gallows the hangman makes a call, Come, if there be any, by the martyr’s zeal enthralled. We’ll tell you all, O sky, wait till the time arrives, How can we at this stage, our secret plans unveil? O martyrs in the nation’s cause, kudos to your sacrifice. Even in the enemy camp they talk of you with praise. Fired by patriotic fervour, many a maddened youth Has gathered at the crossing, itching for the cross. Why are they mute and silent? no whisper, no talk, Everyone that I see has got his lips locked.]

I loved the movie throughout - there wasn’t a moment of time to think while watching the movie…but the after effect left me with a strange feeling. While ‘Dil Chahta hai’ and ‘Swades’ wowed me and filled me with joy, the feeling after ‘Rang de Basanti’ was strange. Yet it was as great a movie, if not greater. I was reminded of the line in Rajkumar Santoshi’s ‘The Legend of Bhagat Singh’ when there was an attempt at mocking Gandhi for not doing enough to save Bhagat Singh, when Naseeruddin Shah (portrayed as Gandhi) says, "Par mein hinsa ka saath nahin de sakta" (I can’t support violence). I felt myself repeating the same words at the end of the movie. The movie certainly got me thinking. And as you think, it sinks deeper into you. At the end of it, I concluded that the message of Swades (Gandhi) and Rang De Basanti (Bhagat Singh) was one and the most important to take home: "You must be the change you want to see in the world" (as said by Mahatma Gandhi). Rang De Basanti, in reality, does not advocate the method, but rather the courage to take on the responsibility for bringing about change. Read these lines by Michael Angier in Top Ten Things to Think About If You Want to Change the World: "The following is inscribed on the tomb of an Anglican Bishop in Westminster Abby (1100 A.D.):

When I was young and free and my imagination had no limits, I dreamed of changing the world. As I grew older and wiser, I discovered the world would not change, so I shortened my sights somewhat and decided to change only my country. But it, too, seemed immovable. As I grew into my twilight years, in one last desperate attempt, I settled for changing only my family, those closest to me, but alas, they would have none of it. And now, as I lie on my deathbed, I suddenly realize: If I had only changed myself first, then by example I would have changed my family. From their inspiration and encouragement, I would then have been able to better my country, and who knows, I may have even changed the world."

I’ve written about the one spark needed to light your inner fire. Go watch ‘Rang de Basanti’. Who knows, it might just be the spark for you!

On 21 Oct, TimeOfIndia brought out an article Google’s googly: PoK is shown as part of Pakistan! by Samiran Chakrawertti [ Friday, October 21, 2005 12:06:59 amTIMES NEWS NETWORK ] showing how on Google Earth, the part of Kashmir occupied by Pakistan in 1947/48 has been shown as part of Pakistan (which legally, as per the instrument of accession and as per the Indian constitution) is a part of India. There were a large number of comments on this article - many expressed concern, many said others like BBC, CNN and all are doing this as well and many others said, "So what! Indians should realise the reality and stop crying hoarse about something that we lost more than 50 years ago". My concern is with this last group - and other Indians who might be thinking this way. The reality today is that most Indians want peace and see the only solution to the Kashmir imbroglio as accepting LoC to be the de-facto international border. The problem is that whenever India and Pakistan want to discuss Kashmir and the possible solutions to it, a number of solutions are cited. Pakistan wants to discuss the part of Kashmir which is under us while India wants LoC to be made into a border. Fine, we want LoC to be the border (and live happily ever after), but there are certain things important in negotiations and bargaining - you can’t begin with your last price. If we are ready to settle for LoC as the border (and for an Indian map with the left ear cut off), we must begin our negotiations higher. Instead of letting Pakistan set the agenda at all international fora, we must be the one setting the agenda. Pakistan discusses what it calls "Indian-occupied Kashmir" or "Indian-held Kashmir" or "held Kashmir" (never mind that hardly any development took place in the so-called Azad Kashmir - alas, no one will find that out now - oh! there was a lot of development…all got destroyed in the quake) while India discusses LoC and soft borders. If Indians want to see the LoC as the border, they must be passionate about discussing PoK (and the word "occupied" here is important). Discuss PoK, only then can we have LoC as the solution, otherwise we might stand to lose more! Note: I’m happy that we were always taught the complete map of India in Geography lessons (including PoK and Aksai Chin). We realise today what has been lost and stands to be lost. A few years of exposure to the Internet and international media (with PoK being shown under Pakistan and Aksai Chin under China or as a separate disputed land), and many Indians are saying, "so what…this is always the case in maps shown outside India"

>Sat Oct 8 2005 Major quake rocks North India, 23 killed >The earthquake has been measured at 7.6 in the Richter scale, epicentre is said to be >Muzzaffrabad in Pakistan and is described as "major". >[ 03:07 pm Sat, Oct 8, 2005, REUTERS ] Times of India seems to have accepted Muzzaffrabad (capital of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir or PoK) as part of Pakistan. A national newspaper should be careful in wording, especially in matters as sensitive as the territorial integrity of the country. Somewhere within the article, it writes: >The US Geological Survey (USGS) highlighted a large earthquake on its Website between >Indian- and Pakistani-controlled Kashmir with a magnitude of 7.6. When I’d read the news-piece first during the day, the article mentioned ‘Pakistani-Kashmir’ and ‘Indian-Kashmir’. While it is understandable for International media to use these terminologies, Indian newspapers must be careful in using the terminology in line with the Constitution of India. Pakistani online papers, such as Dawn, continue to use terms like Srinagar in Indian-held Kashmir or Indian-occupied Kashmir. P.S. It might be a newspiece from Reuters that TimesofIndia is using "as is". Not sure how this works, but in my view, sensitive bits can be put under quotes to show that "we don’t agree with this, but are reporting ‘as is’." In another TimesOfIndia piece, Quake not a surprise: experts IANS[ SATURDAY, OCTOBER 08, 2005 08:58:37 PM ] Referring to a scientist, Purnachandar Rao, from the Natiaonal Geophysical Research Institute (NGRI), it said, ‘He said the exact magnitude of Saturday’s earthquake would be known after they gathered all the relevant details. "At this point of time we can say that the magnitude was in the range of 7 to 7.5 on Richter scale and its epicenter was near Muzaffarabad (in Pakistan)."’ Note: However, in other pieces, TimesOfIndia has used terms like "Muzzafarabad district in PoK" as well. Comments of other Indian nationals on this are solicited.

Share your thoughts and comments.

Share your thoughts and comments.

What is the solution to the Kashmir problem?