August 29 via mobile


Ironically the biggest "positive thinkers" today are the "bad guys". Listen to what they say - "Badnaam hue to naam bhi to hua", "koi nahi dekhega", "bach jayenge", "mujhe koi nahi pakad sakta", etc. "Good" guys say, "log kya kahenge", "pakde jaenge", "koi dekh lega" etc. So these good guys are good because they do negative thinking, and bad are bad because they do positive thinking. :-)



--



August 25 via mobile

If you had also supported Anna Hazare by giving IAC a miss call and are still getting their SMSes, you can send STOPIACSMS as sms to 575758 in order to unsubscribe.



--



August 24 via mobile

Just realized that boys riding Scooties have a competitive advantage. We often give them easy pass thinking they are girls :-) (no matter Hero Maestro likes it ot not)



--



August 20 via mobile

One of my cherished dreams came true today. Have bought The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda published by Advaita Ashrama. Now challenge is to read and learn... (Also, if you know of any public library to whom I can donate new copies of the complete set, plz let me know...)



--



August 20 via mobile

Earliar I thought 'iShapath' was some Apple launch in India. Then wife pointed out the Marathi words and I got a whole new perspective :-)



--



August 19 via mobile

Gulshan Grover is to play MF Hussain in an upcoming film. I think Shakti Kapoor would look more authentic :-) Any worse suggestions please? :-)



--



August 18 via mobile

When they said "Even impossible says i m possible", I replied, perhaps for you "even improper says i m proper".



--



August 17 via mobile

Interesting news on TOI, Pune, Page 2. After muslms had attacked NE students of Poona College, the college had setup an enquiry committee for it. The committee has now stopped the probe, saying that attackers were not college students and the accused mslm students had only "observed the attacks". The news also mentions some committee members - College Principal GM Nazeruddin, V.Prcpl Sr. College Shakeel Ahmed, V.P. Jr. Collge, Abdul Shaikh among others. Ye to hona hi tha!



--



August 18 via mobile

It is said that during the month of Ramzan Muslms live ideal life accrdng to Allah's commandments. The way they have behaved in Pak, Assam and all across India proves it perhaps :) National Commission for Minorities has given its report on Assam violence in which it blamed Hindu Bodos for it and said, "The Bodos need to be told firmly that they cannot engineer a mass exodus of non-Bodos." Perhaps its another case of plagiarism :-) they copied some good article and changed M word with B word...



--

History: The Papyrus Controversy and if Jesus had a wife

Ever since I read The Da Vinci Code, I have been a great fan of Dan Brown. His revelations based on some really serious research impressed me hugely. One of the major pointers which came out of Dan Brown’s books (which also erupted into a controversy) was that Jesus had a wife and she was none other than his disciple Mary Magdalene. In fact I had never observed that there was a lady in The Last Supper by Leonardo Da Vinci before I read Dan Brown. This pointer remained an assertion refuted by many traditionalists amongst Christians who had problems accepting the fact that Jesus Christ could have had a wife. But now, it seems there is a better clarity, thanks to the recent findings.
 

As reported in The New York Times here on 18/09/2012, a professor at Harvard Divinity School, Karen L. King, has found a scrap of papyrus on which Jesus is quoted as referring to “my wife.” As reported, the papyrus seems to have been written in Coptic in the fourth century and contains a phrase never seen in any piece of scripture: “Jesus said to them, ‘My wife …’”
 

The Australian News presents a good review of the finding and how the professor went about it, here. It looks authentic and as reported in the TOI, those who have reviewed the papyrus have said that it looks genuine and is not a fake.
 

The probability of Jesus having a wife has again created a flutter. But at the same time we can’t ignore the Dan Brown connection here. As mentioned in his books, the Church had tried to destroy all evidences of the lady and even distorted facts to suit its own version of the things and history. It will really be a great discovery to bring some of the surviving hard facts and proofs in front of all, so that people could be more aware than knowing what is expected by the Church for them to know.
 

We hope more such revelations come out in the open and throw light on such ignored parts of history. If such issues are controversial, I wish we rise above such controversies and see the ultimate truth. Because truth is one thing which separates us from the animals and if we don’t have it, our civilization doesn’t count much.
 

Disclaimer: The views are personal and not related to any organization attached to the author. The article mentions and provides web links and third party resources referred in this article, to the extent possible.

Visit to Lonavala Bhushi Dam

Bhushi dam is located about 6 km from Lonavala railway station. There are auto-rickshaws playing between the city and the dam (reasonable fare is around Rs 70, though we had to give Rs 100 on either side to be able to reach). On the way to reach there, you may get a good view of the city from its narrow lanes as well as some most beautiful scenery.

When you reach the site, first you have to keep your shoes somewhere because you can’t reach the dam without entering into water. There are small shops and stalls which can keep your belongings till you return, for a fee. There are also shops which provide slippers for your visit, charging Rs 20 for it. In order to reach the high point of the dam, you will be going through the steps of a waterfall. It is an amazing and refreshing experience!

You can see below some of the images we took during the visit. Second last image shows small fish moving around in the water which got collected in small portions of the rock. The last image is of Shivaji Maharaj, as near Lonavala Railway Station.

All pictures © Kumar Rahul Tiwary

You can also checkout the location with very good images shared on the below website:

http://www.placesnearpune.com/2009/07/bushi-dam-in-lonavala/

Rahul

Ganesh Utsav 2012 in Pune (Part-2)

Some more pictures:

All pictures (C) Kumar Rahul Tiwary

Ganesh Utsav 2012 in Pune (Part-1)

Some Pictures taken during Ganpati Utsav 2012 in and around Pune:

(C) All Pics: Kumar Rahul Tiwary

Salary to Wife: Is Wife a Servant? Govt. thinks so!

Kumar Rahul Tiwary; Sep 2012

Politicians world over are famous to make illogical laws and pass laughable dictates. Perhaps latest in the list is an upcoming “law” in India where husbands will be legally bound by law to pay a “salary” to wives for performing household work. Initially when I heard about this proposed law and “salary”, I thought it would be just a means to empower women by making them legally own part of monthly household savings (if there were not enough laws already giving them part of husband’s property). But when I read the actual news which clearly mentioned that this salary would be for the “household work done by wives”, I was shocked. Even my wife laughed at this proposed “law”.

The Proposal:

The proposal is mooted by Ms. Krishna Tirath, Minister for Women and Child Development Let us read the minister in her own words:

“A majority of women in India are involved in household chores after getting married but they do not get any salary for it. The socially accepted behaviour becomes a tragedy when a woman gets divorced or is widowed when she is left with nothing for survival. The Government is mulling to bring a law under which a husband will have to legally pay a definite amount to his wife from his salary and the Ministry has started preparing a draft in this regard,” Tirath told Indian Express.

She also favoured for exempting this income from the tax net saying, “The income of the domestic help or cook is not taxed.” “When the housewife is performing all those chores and much more efficiently, why should her income be taxed?” [Ref]

Wives as domestic helps and cooks

Should we thank the minister for putting housewives ahead of “domestic help” or “cooks” by saying housewives performs “all those chores” and “much more efficiently”? I am not sure.

In my personal opinion, this proposed law is so demeaning and insulting to the women that it should never be passed and needs to be opposed strongly. Putting a price tag for the household work a wife does at “her” home brings her to the class of domestic servants and none better.

This proposed law in current shape not only looks foolish but also is provocative. It is not surprising that it has invited the ire of Men’s Rights Groups who have even asked PM’s intervention to stop this law. Save Family Foundation, representing around 40 men's rights organizations across India, has termed this proposal one-sided [Ref]. May be such proposals bring out some positive changes for the rights of men too?

Many individuals and organizations have rightly opposed this proposal. I liked what novelist Dr SL Bhyrappa said on this issue: [Ref: Salary to wife against Hindu Law]

“As there was no dharma and nyaya concept in the western countries, the economic system of such countries is collapsing. The proposed Bill which is suited for Europe and America, will affect the Indian family system,” he said.

“If the government brings in the Bill, the bondage between husband and wife will no longer hold,” he said.

Track Record of Ms. Krishna Tirath

Ms. Krishna Tirath is an MP from Delhi, and member of Congress Party. Her past looks marred by controversies generated by both silly mistakes and serious cases of corruption:

Ministry of Women and Child Development which is headed by Krishna Tirath published a full page advertisement on 2010 to mark the National Girl Child Day. To the embarrasement of whole nation, former Pakistan Air Force chief Tanvir Mahmood Ahmed's photograph appeared in the Ad along with our PM Dr. Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi. Ultimately, Prime Minister's Office apologized to the nation after Krishna Tirath refused to accept the blunder. You are read this news here [Ref]

In Sep 2012, Central Administrative Tribunal quashed the appoitment of Yashvi Tirath, daughter of Minister Krishna Tirath because of irregularities. You can read about the news here: [Ref: CAT quashes DD selection of minister's kin]

Yashvi Tirath was ranked 33th after a written exam and audition for the post of anchor-cum-correspondent in state run telecaster Doordarshan News. Only 30 candidates were to be called for interview; suddenly, the number was arbitrarily increased to 35. Just as abruptly, barely two days before the interview, its weightage was changed from 25% to 33%.

Yashvi scored an impressive 90 marks in the interview and landed the job. She also happens to be the daughter of minister for women and child welfare Krishna Tirath.

This is only one of 24 such instances of "arbitrary and irregular" appointments made last year that were quashed by the Central Administrative Tribunal on Monday. A shocked Tribunal, headed by chairman V K Bali, cancelled the selection of the journalists working with DD News, finding "misuse of marks in the interview" and "irregularities having vitiated the whole process."

My Conclusions:

1. The proposed law is in blatant disregard to the interests of women and their place in Indian society. It should be rejected and opposed by all.
2. Instead of making such controversial and foolish “laws” to empower women, which would result in more family disharmony as well as degraded status of women in society, the Ministry of Women and Child Development should do real ground work, to both enforce existing laws and to provide support and opportunities to women.
3. Ms. Krishna Tirath, the Minister of Women and Child Development has some tainted past record. All charges of corruption against her should be probed as soon as possible and if found true, she should be punished and the chair should go to someone more competent and sensible than her.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in the article are personal and do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization associated with the author. There is no attempt to hurt the feelings of readers and any unintended ones are regretted. You are welcome to share your own personal opinion on this article in the comments section.

Shahjahan, Mumtaz and Taj Mahal

I just happened to see an interesting discussion. The thread starter made a post which made following four points:

1. Mumtaj was Shahajahan's 4th wife

2. Shahajahan killed Mumtaj's husband to marry her

3. Mumtaj died in her 14th delivery

4. He then married to Mumtaj's sister.

Specifically, the post was asking if Shahjahan really loved Mumtaz Mahal and if Taj Mahal is a much hyped symbol of love?

Someone replied that nothing in the original post was true and quoted some Wikipedia articles. I take interest in historical stuff and thought to do some search. I won’t quote Wikipedia because it is too unreliable for the short term. Anyone can write and save anything there and it remains there till moderator deletes/cleans-up. So I searched only in books as available on Google books and here is what I find:

For the four pieces mentioned in the original post:

1. Mumtaj was Shahajahan's 4th wife

Most easily found resources say that Shahjahan had only 3 wives. But the below book clearly names his three “other” wives. Therefore, it looks that indeed Shahjahan had at least four wives. I have highlighted the portion in red:

Book “Royal Mughal Ladies and Their Contributions”, By Soma Mukherjee, Page 43 mentions, “Three of Shahjahan’s secondary wives, Akbarabadi Mahal, Fatehpuri Mahal and Sarhindi Mahal built mosques in Delhi.” [Ref]

 

The number of four also looks more logical because since Islam allows 4 wives, the king won’t have left this ‘opportunity’ gone by. Anyways, the book clearly mentions that he had at least four legal wives.

2. Shahajahan killed Mumtaj's husband to marry her

In my small research I couldn’t find references for this but it is a historical fact that Shahjahan had killed all his brothers and their families in order to become king himself. This fact itself is enough to tell us how bloodthirsty he was and in case he killed Mumtaj’s (original name Arjumand Banu Begum) family too, it won’t come as a surprise to me.

Book “The Story of the World: Early modern times from…” By Susan Wise Bauer, Page 68 mentions this point in Q&A: [Ref]

Q: How did Shah Jahan protect his claim to the throne?

A: He put all his rivals to death – including his own brothers!

 

It is mentioned everywhere that Shahjahan and Mumtaz (Arjumand Banu Begum) were in love for 5 years after which only they got married. Also it is written that Mumtaz was the niece of the famous queen of Jehangir - Nur Mahal. Jehangir was Shahjahan’s father  and hence Nur Jahan was Shahjahan’s step-mother. As soon as Shahjahan had become ruler after Jahangir’s death, he had imprisoned his step-mother Nur Jahan also. So will it be a surprise that he did excesses to Nurjahan’s family? (all these facts are mentioned everywhere including in Wikipedia)

3. Mumtaj died in her 14th delivery

This is true and mentioned everywhere.

4. He then married to Mumtaj's sister.

I am not sure about this and it looks that he didn’t marry another girl after Mumtaz’s death. He had at least two other wives alive including Akbarabadi Mahal after Mumtaj’s death. But the reason can be more curious than simply his unconditional love.

Mumtaj Mahal died in 1631, and then Shahjahan got busy building Taj Mahal during 1632-1653. By the time Taj Mahal was built, Shahjahan was 60 years old (he was born in 1592). We don't expect him to remarry at the age of 60; do we? Of course he couldn’t marry more women before Taj Mahal was complete otherwise the building would be a ridicule. Anyways he had his other wives alive for him. Now just 5 years after Taj Mahal was built (1658), one of his sons Aurangzeb entered Agra, imprisoned him, and his life was at constant threat. We don't expect Shahjahan to marry inside the prison; do we?

I am not sure if he married Mumtaj’s sister but there is a disturbing account of references available which tell that he had an illicit relationship with his own daughter Jahanara Begum. I got this text: The European traveler Francois Bernier wrote, "Begum Sahib, the elder daughter of Shah Jahan was very beautiful... Rumor has it that his attachment reached a point which it is difficult to believe, the justification of which he rested on the decision of the Mullas, or doctors of their law. According to them it would have been unjust to deny the king the privilege of gathering fruit from the tree he himself had planted." Joannes de Laet was the first European to write about this rumor. Peter Mundy and Jean Baptiste Tavernier wrote about the same allegations.

May be the author wrote sister instead of actually writing “daughter”? 

The same is mentioned in numerous books:

1. Travels in the Mogul Empire - Page 11, Francois Bernier [Ref]
2. The Peacock Throne: the drama of Mogul India - Page 118, Waldemar Hansen [Ref]
3. Royal Mughal ladies and their contributions - Page 58. Soma Mukherjee [Ref]
4. Domesticity and power in the early Mughal world - Page 43, Ruby Lal [Ref]
5. The Taj Mahal is a temple palace, Purushottam Nagesh Oak [Ref]
6. Taj Mahal: passion and genius at the heart of the Moghul empire, Diana Preston, Michael Preston [Ref]

Though the fact remains that even after marrying Mumtaj Mahal, Shahjahan had gone on marrying other women. (His other marriages had also happened after his marriage to Mumtaj Mahal.) But then kings and rulers marry also for political reasons and at their whims, so I would give him a benefit of doubt…

In my opinion Taj Mahal may still be a good example of “love” but not of a good “lover”. Shahjahan’s character seems too dark and ugly. But who says murderers and corrupt people can’t love their wife truly? I see it this way…

I see Taj Mahal as a symbol of love, but not a symbol of love belonging to any particular lovers.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in the article are personal and do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization associated with the author. The portions of the book quoted have been taken from openly available Google books. There is no attempt to hurt the feelings of readers and any unintended ones are regretted. You are welcome to share your own personal opinion on this article in the comments section.