Latest news with #JagdishBatra
Time of India
4 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Is Manusmriti that bad?
Jagdish Batra is Professor Emeritus of English, SRM University in Haryana. He has nearly four decades of teaching and research experience. His area of specialization is Indian English Fiction on which he has presented papers at many international conferences in Europe and South East Asia. A Rotary Study Exchange Scholar to USA, Dr Batra has published eight books besides some sixty research papers and a number of general articles/blogs etc. LESS ... MORE That the Indian politics is caste-based goes without saying. The projected caste census is the culmination of such politics. With each passing day, the casteist discourse will become shriller, for sure. However, it is a matter of regret that even the academia has willy nilly become involved in this political slugfest. Recent flip-flop over the inclusion of Manusmriti as part of the study of Dharmashastra in the Delhi University's UG syllabus has once again brought the text into public discourse. It would be pertinent to recall the take of politicians on Manusmriti from the days of independence of the country. The first adverse comment on this text came from Dr B.R. Ambedkar, who is venerated as the messiah of the depressed classes in India for the provision of the reservation clause in the constitution prepared under his chairmanship of the drafting committee. The issue of implementation of the Mandal Commission recommendations in the 1990s brought the focus back on to the caste-based politics. The Bahujan Samaj Party, under late Kanshi Ram and then under Mayawati took up the Manusmriti castigating it as responsible for the discrimination in Hindu society against the so-called lower castes. We know that Manusmriti locates in the ancient society four varnas. There is difference between varna and caste. According to latest research as mentioned in the book Varna, Jati, Caste (2023) authored by Indologists Rajiv Malhotra and Vijaya Vishwanathan, the castes were the result of intermingling of varnas which shows there was no discrimination. It was only during the oppressive Muslim period that the jatis degenerated into a rigid hierarchical structure due to various constrains put on the Hindu society. Now the jatis were declared based on birth. This continued during the English period because the colonizers could pit one caste against the other in keeping with their policy of 'divide and rule'. However, there are several verses in Manusmriti which prohibit intermixing of varnas and lay down punishment in some cases for flouting this injunction. The contradiction can be resolved if we believe the verses to be more of prescription than description of reality. There is no doubt that such discrimination goes against the very ethos of Hinduism that believes that God created and indeed lives in every body. Such practices have done much harm to Hinduism. Times have changed and people belonging to different castes do adopt different professions than those prescribed for their varnas in ancient times. As such, any kind of discrimination is certainly not acceptable. Another objection against Manusmriti is regarding status of women in society. A woman, according to Manusmriti must treat her husband as god. Also, it says that a woman is under the watchful eyes of father as an unmarried girl; under the protection of husband as a married woman; and under the care of son in old age. On the other hand, no difference between male and female with regard to various samskaras like yagyopavit, and the inheritance of property is found in the book. Women's position in society is exalted by the assertion that gods reside where women are worshipped. The paradox can probably be resolved by taking into account the differential in calibre and status of the woman in various situations. While a weak woman may need protection from others, a scholar is worshipped for her intellectual acumen and there is no dearth of hallowed female scholars in our history. There is need to ask if Manusmriti is all about discrimination and has no historical or social value. Without paying much attention to the East India Company people who took it as the base to understand and formulate certain laws to govern the Hindu community, a dispassionate study shows that it deals with a number of important subjects, starting with the theme of creation, explaining the geography of Brahmavarta and Aryavarta, social structure, duties and rights of people in all stations and ashrams or phases of life, etc. The text also takes up the emergence of Dharma or the law governing day-to-day conduct of people, explaining in minute detail various issues related to personal and social life. The book is rightly known all over the world as the Law of Manu. The minute details go to the extent of describing what would be called table manners in our times — prohibition to wear one cloth while taking food, maintenance of cleanliness of a place, protection of environment, performance of various rituals from birth to shraadh, rules for copulation; manners like respecting the aged, not laughing at the handicapped, etc. All of these are quite relevant to our times. All said and done, there is need to place Manusmriti in proper context. It is a valuable historical document that describes the society of a particular time. Surely, not all that is there in it is relevant today. It may be mentioned here that of the two categories of classical Sanskrit texts — Shruti and Smriti, the former is believed to have been conveyed by the Almighty in the beginning of the creation to certain rishis through intuition. These are sacrosanct and not amenable to change. But the Smriti texts were created by humans even though these explain and illustrate the Shruti and relate to us what is practically relevant in the day-to-day life, and so these are subject to revisions and recensions. No religious injunction is violated in Hinduism if Manusmriti is not followed in toto. In fact, as opposed to Manusmriti, in some regions, Yajnavalkya Smriti — another of the 18 Smriti texts — which is more liberal in treatment of women and lower classes is preferred. Another approach is how Swami Dayanand Saraswati, the founder of Arya Samaj accepted the text: he rejected those parts of Manusmriti which are contradictory in sense to the Vedas. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
Time of India
11-06-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Shri Banke Bihari Mandir must have an easy approach
Jagdish Batra is Professor Emeritus of English, SRM University in Haryana. He has nearly four decades of teaching and research experience. His area of specialization is Indian English Fiction on which he has presented papers at many international conferences in Europe and South East Asia. A Rotary Study Exchange Scholar to USA, Dr Batra has published eight books besides some sixty research papers and a number of general articles/blogs etc. LESS ... MORE The Uttar Pradesh government plan to construct a corridor for the famous Shri Banke Bihari Mandir in Vrindavan has run into rough weather with the review petition put before the Supreme Court for its earlier judgment that allowed the state government to go ahead with a Rs. 500 crore development plan for the temple corridor. While the constitutional propriety involved in this exercise is sacrosanct, the urgency to improve the conditions on the ground cannot be ignored either. The grounds for objection in the review petition filed by a priest Devendra Nath Goswami include not taking his consent — he being a key stakeholder – in passing the earlier judgment, and the use of temple funds. One must not miss the point here that the issue does not hinge on not consulting the priestly clan only, it is linked to the huge donations that the temple receives and out of which the government intends getting the finances for the purpose. The shopkeepers around the temple are understandably peeved over the plan since they would be uprooted or relocated elsewhere. There is certainly an urgent need to widen the approach roads and beautify the place as has been done in case of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple at Varanasi. On any given day, thousands of people visit the temple located in the narrow streets of Vrindavan and a lot of inconvenience is faced by the devotees. One can see many devotees performing parikrama (going round the town) while measuring the distance with their body in prostrate posture. It happens on dirty roads where open drains flow alongside. Add to it the toxic fumes of three-wheelers driving bumper-to-bumper. Stampede occurred in 2022 costing two lives but stampede-like conditions prevail every other day in the narrow street leading to the temple. Taking advantage of this, many unscrupulous elements capitalize on it. My family had a taste of it recently. We – a family of five – visited Vrindavan on a holiday, when there is generally a huge rush. At least a kilometer before the temple, we were part of the slow-moving crowd with people pushing and jostling one another. The women in the family were on the verge of fainting and I suggested giving up and trying the next day. But soon we were accosted by a person hollering 'VIP Darhsan, VIP Darshan'. We were tempted to engage him for Rs. 1500. Next, he took us up and down several narrow, rough and untidy bylanes. After some 20 minutes of trek, we were ushered into the temple and made to stand at the platform at the far end of the temple compound from where we were asked to view the deity. In the sanctum sanctorum, nothing was visible. Not all of us could see the deity but were so fatigued due to constant pushing and shoving and the tumult that we had to leave the temple soon. It was Indeed a harrowing experience. I am sure a lot of people do savour this kind of experience. How can feelings of devotion and spiritualism thrive in such an atmosphere? Lakhs of devotees would want wider roads leading to the temple. The priests must rise above personal considerations and view the temple as the property of the entire Hindu community. When the Mata Vaishno Devi shrine in Jammu and the Ram Mandir at Ayodhya have had beautiful makeovers, why are the priests of Vrindavan resisting the change? The state government's intention was commendable when it promulgated a new ordinance on May 26 — Shri Bankey Bihari Ji Mandir Nyas Adhiniyam 2025. Under it, the government proposed to form a Trust Board responsible for managing the temple. The Board has fair representation to all stakeholders including distinguished individuals from Vaishnav traditions; other branches of Sanatan Dharma; scholars, educators, entrepreneurs, and social workers associated with Hindu society; and also two representatives from the temple's historical Goswami lineage. So, why should there be any problem to the priests who have moved the review petition? Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
Time of India
30-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Harvard's activities must alarm the Indian philanthropists
Dr Jagdish Batra is a senior academic, currently working as Professor of English at O.P. Jindal Global University, India. He has nearly four decades of teaching and research experience. His area of specialization is Indian English Fiction on which he has presented papers at many international conferences in Europe and South East Asia. A Rotary Study Exchange Scholar to USA, Dr Batra has published eight books besides some sixty research papers and a number of general articles/blogs etc. LESS ... MORE The Lakshmi Mittal and Family South Asia Institute at Harvard University is in the eye of the storm over the organization of the Pakistan Conference under its aegis, in which Pro-Pakistan speakers were invited, obviously to whitewash Pakistan's image in the wake of the Pahalgam carnage of 26 tourists. To counter the media backlash in India, the Institute page has removed the detail of proceedings from its website and supplanted it with a statement claiming that the student organizers along with their faculty advisor were solely responsible for organizing the event in which the Pakistani Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb and Pakistan's Ambassador to the US, Rizwan Saeed Sheikh participated. 'Following our principles of operation, we did not consult any benefactor of the Institute about this conference,' says the notice, alongwith a formal expression of sorrow, though without naming Pakistan in it. This is indeed a poor strategy to avoid criticism directed at the university and the benefactor concerned who were equally responsible for organizing the conference at this critical juncture. What lends credence to this conclusion is also the removal of a page from the Institute site whose rump is still available on Google. It begins with 'Previewing the inaugural Pakistan conference 2025: 14 Apr 2025 — The Mittal Institute sat down with the two conference co-chairs—Muhammad Hadi from the Harvard Graduate School of Education and Sannan Pervaiz …'. So, it is not just the students and the faculty advisor of the conference, but also the benefactor and two conference co-chairs. This conference by Pakistan sympathizers on the Harvard campus only shows disdain of the Centre for human rights of which the university professes to be the world champion. It is not the first time that Harvard has been involved in anti-India and anti-Hindu projects. One recalls the Dismantling Hindutva Conference held online in 2022 in which Harvard was the key player along with many other American and European universities. It was basically directed at the pro-Hindu policies of the Modi government. Surprisingly, anything going in favour of Hindus in the world rankles these 'elite' institutions which are devoted to the DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusivity) philosophy. One finds a number of India-centred study centres supported by Indian billionaires in many American universities. People like Murty, Ambani, Mahindra, Piramal, et al have been contributing mammothly to them without scrutinizing the operations of these institutions. Narayan Murthy's funding of the Murty Classical Library under late Sheldon Pollock is a case in point. Now, Pollock, much like Wendy Doniger, has been instrumental in presenting a distorted and degraded interpretation of our scriptural texts. Funding for the DEI projects supposedly to bring about social justice in India for the marginalized sections seems innocuous, but actually these projects are carried out with the aim to create divisions in the Indian society. How Harvard has been aiming to create problems for India can be gauged from the Indologist Rajiv Malhotra's assertion in his recent book Snakes in the Ganga that a clandestine project undertaken by Harvard University to study the tribal Munda languages spoken in Chhattisgarh and Odisha states was not exactly for love of an obscure language but meant to promote a new theory that the Munda speakers were the original inhabitants of the Indian subcontinent which would mean that both Aryans and Dravidians were outsiders! One needs to be reminded of the Maoist movement rife in that area which might serve as part of the toolkit to dismember India. When it comes to highlighting India and its positive influence on the world, Harvard is least interested. Malhotra's attempts to get its researchers take up projects on Vivekananda's influence on America got lip service only, so did his plea to promote India-loving Transcendentalist Ralph Emerson's writings. In case of Thoreau, Harvard simply denied India's influence – something clearly indicated in his book Walden Pond – besides ignoring such request in the case of Nobel-awardee T.S. Eliot, who had studied Sanskrit texts and used Sanskrit aphorisms in his poems. Harvard has also been criticized by Malcolm Gladwell, the acclaimed author of The Tipping Point for its bias in admissions where it discriminates against Indian students and prefers other races. This attitude had been criticized by the US Supreme Court also which in its 2023 judgment mentioned race-conscious admissions programmes at Harvard and the University of North Carolina and found them violative of the Equal Protection Clause. Now that the Trump administration has withdrawn grants to Harvard and some other universities, will the Indian billionaires have a second thought about funding these universities? Why don't they divert these funds to Indian universities and provide to Indian students good education at reasonable cost? The growing strictness about visa in America and Canada provides a huge opportunity to the Indian universities, government and the philanthropists to work together and come up with an elaborate world-class education system that will save for the country billions going out on account of foreign education. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
Time of India
15-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Ceasefire means a tight-rope walk
Dr Jagdish Batra is a senior academic, currently working as Professor of English at O.P. Jindal Global University, India. He has nearly four decades of teaching and research experience. His area of specialization is Indian English Fiction on which he has presented papers at many international conferences in Europe and South East Asia. A Rotary Study Exchange Scholar to USA, Dr Batra has published eight books besides some sixty research papers and a number of general articles/blogs etc. LESS ... MORE It is the general feeling that the ceasefire announcement made by the government has dampened the spirit, not only of the army men, but also of people at large in the country. It does not fully address the issues which impelled the launch of the Sindoor operation. Midway, the campaign has been forced to stop without fully achieving our objectives, which reminds one of how Nehru did in 1948 when a successful operation was on in Kashmir against the Pakistan intruders camouflaged as tribals. However, the situation is not that simple and many aspects need attention. So far as mediation is concerned, going to the negotiating table now would be akin to the Tashkent talks mediated by Russia or post-Kargil negotiations mediated by America. So, if talks of mediation are true it will not be the first time that India would agree to such a proposal. But we must remember that in both these situations, India was the loser. It seems our government did not want to offend President Donald Trump who is sought to be on the same page as India in the face of threat from China. But one can't really trust America, which has failed to supply essential arms during previous wars, while Russia has been a consistent ally. Placating Trump may mean creating wedge with Russia whose S400 missile system has been so effective this time in thwarting the volley of drones shot by Pakistan. Also worrying is Trump's reported claim of American mediation in solving the long-standing Kashmir issue? That will indeed be going back on public proclamations at home and at UN fora refusing third-party mediation on the Kashmir issue. That would also be against the Shimla Agreement between India and Pakistan. Trusting America as a fair arbiter is fraught with risks. Trump's role in trying to mediate in Arab-Israel or Russia-Ukraine wars does not evoke any optimism. That apart, one feels baffled because the PM had talked of the final settlement (aar-paar ki ladai) and teaching lesson to the terrorists' patrons (aakaas). All defence experts and generals were unanimous in claiming a positive scenario for effecting the break-up of Pakistan and consequently final relief from terrorism for India. Surely, the Balochis and the Pashtuns as also Afghans were waiting for it. Several leaders of the ruling dispensation assured that it was a pause, and not a full stop to the Operation Sindoor, which meant that the operation had been suspended for time being, and may start again. How far this will prove to be true – only time will tell. Indian public at large is confused about the so called distinction between fighting Pakistan and fighting terrorists. It seems more of hair-splitting since the government has always been blaming Pakistan as the progenitor and disseminator of terrorism throughout the world. How can it now separate the two? While effecting the 'pause' in the operation, the government must ponder over the Hamas strategy of war adopted by Pakistan when it sent out barrages of drones across the border – whether to wreck destruction or to monitor army presence in India. Pakistan's acceptance of ceasefire, if seen through the Hamas lens, means seeking time to replenish military supplies, repairing the defunct air attack shield and airfields, etc. in order to launch fresh offensive later. Experience tells us that Pakistan has never cared for making good its promises, much less observing the ceasefire norms over the last seven decades. The leopard will not change its spots now. There is no doubt that the situation is very complex with the other two neighbours – China and Bangladesh being hostile to India. At best, the government's intention is to present the image of a country that believes in fair dealings, so that the 'pause' will give the world the idea that India has tried its best to thwart a full-fledged war. It is indeed a tight-rope walk and one wishes the country comes out of this predicament victorious. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
Time of India
27-04-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
A small window on peace may still be open
Dr Jagdish Batra is a senior academic, currently working as Professor of English at O.P. Jindal Global University, India. He has nearly four decades of teaching and research experience. His area of specialization is Indian English Fiction on which he has presented papers at many international conferences in Europe and South East Asia. A Rotary Study Exchange Scholar to USA, Dr Batra has published eight books besides some sixty research papers and a number of general articles/blogs etc. LESS ... MORE There is hardly any doubt that the dastardly act committed by terrorists at Pahalgam has the backing of Pakistan. If any iota of doubt remained, it was laid to rest by the Pakistani Defence Minister Khwaja Asif when he admitted that for the past three decades, his country had been backing, training and funding terrorists – doing the 'dirty work'. Despite this acknowledgement by the Defence Minister, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has self-appraised his country as the 'world's frontline state against terrorism' which has 'endured immense loss'. The plain reality is what age-old wisdom tells us – if you dig a ditch for others, you fall into it. Pakistan nourished terrorists who are now bleeding it in some cases. And yet it won't forsake that path! It would be naivety of the utmost order if anyone believes Pakistan's belated posture of innocence. India is totally justified in aiming to defang the terror apparatus in its vicinity. In this, India has rightly got the support of an overwhelming majority of countries in the world which will definitely help her to deal with Pakistan with an iron hand which has become necessary considering that over decades, umpteen peaceful overtures by India have failed to bring Pakistan on to the right path. The spectre of war, therefore, is very real. There is no doubt that the war will make a dent in the development efforts of both countries, more so in case of Pakistan due to its doddering economy. Besides, in a war, it is not merely the army men and women who lose their lives, but even the ordinary people staying away from the border suffer as the daily visuals of the two war zones in the world show us presently. The non-invasive treatment of Pakistan in the form of suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty is already causing anxiety to Pakistan. It is a big, big blow as the three rivers course through entire landmass of Pakistan before merging with the Indus and then on with the Arabian sea. With water from the biggest river unavailable, agriculture activities will be hit, leading to famines and collapse of agro-based industries, etc. Even drinking water will become scarce for the people. How long will Pakistan be able to exist? The government and the army there have to seriously consider this scenario. The people of Pakistan have been suffering due to economic problems and have been admiring India as a model of development. There is frustration in almost all parts of Pakistan — not only in Pak-occupied Kashmir and Baluchistan but also in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Sindh. A small push by India can create existential problem for Pakistan. Therefore, it is in Pakistan's interest to seek peace and not conflict with India. The ball is in Pakistan's court and time is running short. There is, however, a small window which offers hope. It must think of wiping off the blot of being a 'Terroristan', to use late Sushma Swaraj's term used for that country. For this, it needs to shun terror as the state policy and dismantle terror structure – training camps, launching pads, etc. – on its land. It must hand over terrorists wanted by India for their misdeeds directed at the people and state of India. That will surely help defuse the highly tense situation prevailing now. Only that gesture will help Pakistan to prove its claim of fighting terrorism and be a respectable member of the comity of nations. India will then surely help Pakistan as an equal and worthy neighbour and assist it come out of the morass into which it has fallen. This is easily said than done, considering the Pakistan army's vested interest in fomenting terror acts to keep its control over state finances and power. When the army generals there look at the peace and progress happening in Kashmir this side of the border, they fear a pushback. But the Pakistani people, who are at the receiving end, recognise now the gameplan and have been voicing their distrust of the army. It is democratic countries that garner respect in the world. Ultimately, it is the people's voice that will force the army to capitulate sooner than later. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
