Wednesday, January 5, 2022
What is the GOTRA system
*पाकिस्तान और मुस्लिम लीग*
Tuesday, November 23, 2021
मराठवाडा मुक्तिसंग्राम -- राजाराम भागोजी जाधव
Friday, October 15, 2021
गंगा दशहरा
Wednesday, August 25, 2021
A very tolerent Indian Civilisation
Those who claim that India is becoming an intolerant nation must read this. Khalaf Al-Harbi is a liberal columnist and a thinker from Saudi Arabia. His liberal views and objective columns on various issues are a big hit and widely discussed across the world.
In his latest column in 'Saudi Gazette', he heaps praises over India describing it as the most tolerant nation on the earth. In his column titled 'India - A country that rides elephants', Khalaf Al Harbi writes: "In India, there are more than 100 religions and more than 100 languages. Yet, the people live in peace and harmony. They have all joined hands to build a strong nation that can produce everything from a sewing needle to the rocket which is preparing to go to Mars. I must say that I feel a bit jealous because I come from a part of the world which has one religion and one language and yet there is killing everywhere. No matter how the world speaks about tolerance, India remains the oldest and most important school to teach tolerance and peaceful co-existence regardless of the religious, social, political or ethnical differences."
He goes on to state that the stereotypical picture of India in the minds of many is linked to poverty and backwardness which is a totally false picture which has nothing to do with reality.
Al-Harbi adds that it is a picture which was created by our extreme judgment of things. When we were poor before the era of oil, the picture of India in our minds was linked to richness and civilization but immediately after our financial conditions improved, we converted India's picture to one of poverty and backwardness.
If we had any sort of wisdom, we would never have been occupied by India's richness or poverty. Rather, we would have been impressed by India's immense ability to contain and respect the conflicting ideologies and thoughts so that people would flood the streets without any feeling of fear or anxiety.
If we took all the Arabs and placed them in India as part of a grand experiment, they would not make up any recognizable majority. They would, instead, dissolve in a fearless human ocean. Their nationalistic trends and sectarian extremism would also dissolve with them and they would realize that nothing in the world can justify the killing of their brothers and sisters.
He also tries to tell the Arab world that diversity and co-existence of thoughts and beliefs are in the DNA of Indian culture. He writes, "India is one of the largest and oldest democracies in the world. It had never known huge differences in religions or races. The country does not disdain its poor people nor hate its rich citizens. It is a nation which is proud of Gandhi and the British colonialists at the same time."
"The Indian people are distinguished in many ways. They are great people. Nobody can deny this fact except the envious or the ungrateful."
"The only problem with the hypothetical trip of the Arabs to India is that they may contaminate the Indians and remind them of their religious and ethnical differences. The Arabs may be able to convince the Indians that their religious and racial disparities may be enough of reason to kill each other."
Monday, August 23, 2021
Akhand Bharat
*How many of you know that ..*
*Q: Partition of India was done how many times ?*
*Answer- SEVEN times in 61 years by the British rule.*
*Afghanistan was separated from India in 1876,*
*Nepal in 1904,*
*Bhutan in 1906,*
*Tibet in 1907,*
*Sri Lanka in 1935,*
*Myanmar (Burma) in 1937*
*and...*
*Pakistan in 1947.*
*India's Partition of Akhanda Bharat*
Unbroken India extended from the Himalayas to the Indian Ocean and from Iran to Indonesia. India’s area in 1857 was 83 lakh square kilometers, which is currently 33 lakh square kilometers. From 1857 to 1947, India was fragmented many times by external powers. Afghanistan was separated from India in 1876, Nepal in 1904, Bhutan in 1906, Tibet in 1907, Sri Lanka in 1935, Myanmar in 1937 and Pakistan in 1947.
*Sri Lanka*
The British separated Sri Lanka from India in 1935. The old name of Sri Lanka was Sinhaldeep. The name Sinhaldeep was later renamed Ceylon. Sri Lanka’s name was Tamraparni during the reign of Emperor Ashoka. Mahendra, son of Emperor Ashoka and daughter Sanghamitra went to Sri Lanka to propagate Buddhism. Sri Lanka is a part of united India.
*Afghanistan*
The ancient name of Afghanistan was Upganasthan and Kandahar’s was Gandhara. Afghanistan was a Shaivite country. The Gandhara described in the Mahabharata is in Afghanistan from where the Kauravas’ mother was Gandhari and maternal uncle Shakuni. The description of Kandahar i.e. Gandhara is found till the reign of Shah Jahan. It was a part of India. In 1876 Gandamak treaty was signed between Russia and Britain. After the treaty, Afghanistan was accepted as a separate country.
*Myanmar (Burma)*
The ancient name of Myanmar (Burma) was Brahmadesh. In 1937, the recognition of a separate country to Myanmar i.e. Burma was given by the British. In ancient times, the Hindu king Anandavrata ruled here.
*Nepal*
Nepal was known as Deodhar in ancient times. Lord Buddha was born in Lumbini and mother Sita was born in Janakpur which is in Nepal today. Nepal was made a separate country in 1904 by the British. Nepal was called the Hindu nation of Nepal. Nepal was made a separate country in 1904 by the British. Nepal was called as Hindu Rashtra Nepal. Until a few years ago, the king of Nepal was called Nepal Naresh. Nepal has 81 percent Hindus and 9% Buddhists. Nepal was an integral part of India during the reigns of Emperor Ashoka and Samudragupta. In 1951, Maharaja Tribhuvan Singh of Nepal appealed to the then Prime Minister of India, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru to merge Nepal with India, but Jawaharlal Nehru rejected the proposal.
*Thailand*
Thailand was known as Siam until 1939. The major cities were Ayodhya, Shri Vijay etc. The construction of Buddhist temples in Siam began in the third century. Even today many Shiva temples are there in this country. The capital of Thailand Bangkok also has hundreds of Hindu temples.
*Cambodia*
Cambodia is derived from the Sanskrit name Kamboj, was part of unbroken India. The Kaundinya dynasty of Indian origin ruled here from the first century itself. People here used to worship Shiva, Vishnu and Buddha. The national language was Sanskrit. Even today in Cambodia, the names of Indian months such as Chet, Visakh, Asadha are used. The world famous Angkorwat temple is dedicated to Lord Vishnu, which was built by the Hindu king Suryadev Varman. The walls of the temple have paintings related to the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. The ancient name of Angkorwat is Yashodharpur.
*Vietnam*
The ancient name of Vietnam is Champadesh and its principal cities were Indrapur, Amravati and Vijay. Many Shiva, Lakshmi, Parvati and Saraswati temples will still be found here. Shivling was also worshiped here. The people were called Cham who were originally Shaivites.
*Malaysia*
The ancient name of Malaysia was Malay Desh which is a Sanskrit word which means the land of mountains. Malaysia is also described in Ramayana and Raghuvansham. Shaivism was practiced in Malay. Goddess Durga and Lord Ganesha were worshiped. The main script here was Brahmi and Sanskrit was the main language.
*Indonesia*
The ancient name of Indonesia is Dipantar Bharat which is also mentioned in the Puranas. Deepantar Bharat means the ocean across India. It was the kingdom of Hindu kings. The largest Shiva temple was in the island of Java. The temples were mainly carved with Lord Rama and Lord Krishna. The Bhuvanakosh is the oldest book containing 525 verses of Sanskrit.
The names or motos of the leading institutions of Indonesia are still in Sanskrit :
Indonesian Police Academy – Dharma Bijaksana Kshatriya
Indonesia National Armed Forces – Tri Dharma Ek Karma
Indonesia Airlines – Garun Airlines
Indonesia Ministry of Home Affairs – Charak Bhuvan
Indonesia Ministry of Finance – Nagar Dhan Raksha
Indonesia Supreme Court – Dharma Yukti
*Tibet*
The ancient name of Tibet was Trivishtam which was divided into two parts. One part was given to China and the other to Lama after an agreement between the Chinese and the British in 1907. In 1954, India’s Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru accepted Tibet as part of China to show his solidarity to Chinese people.
*Bhutan*
Bhutan was separated from India by the British in 1906 and recognized as a separate country. Bhutan is derived from the Sanskrit word Bhu Utthan which means high ground.
*Pakistan*
There was partition of India on August 14, 1947 by the British and Pakistan came into existence as East Pakistan and West Pakistan. Mohammad Ali Jinnah had been demanding a separate country on the basis of religion since 1940 which later became Pakistan. In 1971 with the cooperation of India, Pakistan was divided again and Bangladesh came into existence. Pakistan and Bangladesh were parts of India.
Saturday, August 7, 2021
Inefficiency of Using an Adopted Language
Professional Inefficiency of Using an Adopted Language in Communication
Most businesses in India use English as the mode of written communication. With India’s diversity of language, English made sense as the lingua franca at the dawn of the republic, but from a purely business perspective, English has proved to be a poor medium that has created false hierarchies within organizations.
The irony of this piece being written in English is not lost on the author. However, in no way am I denigrating English. It is one of the most advanced and constantly advancing languages in the world. Not only is it among the most spoken tongues on the planet, it is also the language that has produced the greatest literature, in volume and style. But in the limited context of Indian business, it adds layers of confusion that can be avoided.
Humans experience the humorous as well as serious effects of bad communication on a daily basis. Inadvertent puns and comical typos on signages are ubiquitous, but they are only the visible examples of sub-optimum communication. In the Indian professional world, what passes as corporate professional language, namely English, adds an additional layer of inefficiency.
India is uniquely primed for linguistic chaos; it is the cost of our diversity. For an overwhelming majority of us, English is not out first language. In most cases, it is not even our second. Yet, most professional organisations operating in India insist on using English as the exclusive mode of written communication. In multinational firms, this is ineluctable, since reports and emails are shared with professionals from multiple countries, but in Indian organisations, it is an avoidable cause of inefficiency.
Corporations in Europe as well as in major Asian economies have long figured out that using their mother tongue drowns out much of the noise from corporate communication. Indeed, factory safety instructions written in a language not understood by factory workers cannot be called safety instructions at all. The usage of one’s mother tongue for written communication is not a phenomenon reserved for developed economies. Companies in countries that are on the path to development have also realised that for quick and seamless communication, employees must use the language they are most comfortable with.
As a society, we persist with English and insist on using it as hours of productivity melt away. Perhaps what’s needed is an outsider’s gaze to make sense of this choice. My own experience in the corporate world abroad was that communication is much more efficient when business is conducted in the language everyone is proficient in. Something frightful happens when people begin to write in an adopted language. They seem to lose their capacity for self-criticism and have a way of sounding careless. After all, the advantage of business writing over business speech is an opportunity to be more articulate and precise.
In India, a staggering amount of an employee’s time is spent on activities like clarifying and repeating written messages on the phone, or other activities directly linked to language inadequacy. Badly punctuated emails, misconstrued instructions, and criminal spelling errors can start a chain of misunderstandings that require diplomatic gymnastics to salvage. Also, in a country where ego plays a big part in transactions, the potential cost of such confusion is huge. Clearly, opting to communicate in a language which most employees are not proficient in is a conscious choice to accept inefficiency in a crucial aspect of running a business.
It’s not right to call English a ‘foreign’ language as it does hold a position as one of many national languages of India and it has been widely adopted despite its origins lying elsewhere. There is no doubt that teaching English in public schools and learning English, even as an adult exposes one to a vast amount of texts for personal and professional development. That is certainly a fruitful exercise, but one cannot replace one’s mother tongue. Only in rare cases does one develop more command over an adopted tongue than over one’s mother tongue.
What is surprising is that companies that obsess over inefficiencies in operations and nitpick to reduce overheads by employing the latest management philosophies do not act on the flagrant linguistic inefficiencies they are propagating. The foundation of approaches like ‘Lean’ and ‘Six Sigma’ is an attempt to cut waste to run a tighter unit, but these approaches are largely ignored when it comes to written communication.
The obvious question that arises from all these hullabaloo is, “What language should be used for corporate communication in India?” To me, the answer is clear. To avoid crippling loss of productivity, companies ought to insist on using the language of the hallways as the official written medium of communication. The language that employees use to converse in during breaks and to discuss personal matters and wellbeing is the best mode of official communication as well. In much of north India, it will be Hindi, whereas in Maharashtra it will be Marathi and in Bengal, Bengali, and so on. Before you jump to conclusions based on preconceived notions, there is an example of the world’s second biggest economy.
Before the 1980’s, communist China was closed to the rest of the world by an Asian iron curtain of sorts. Once China opened its doors to globalisation, multinational investments poured into the country. Through its rapid rise – double-digit GDP growth throughout the nineties and oughts – China did not adopt English as its language of business. To this day, internal and external corporate communication is conducted in Mandarin and Cantonese. Astonishingly, this trend has outlasted the computer revolution.
Computer keyboards in China are in the local language. The same is true for Japan and many other developed as well as developing countries. The apprehension that switching away from an English keyboard would mean that Indian companies would suddenly have to stop using their swanky spreadsheets and graphic interfaces is mislaid. On the contrary, all major corporate software companies offer multilingual versions of their products. Chinese versions exist of every imaginable software. With widespread adoption of Indian languages by companies, Indian versions of software will certainly follow, considering the size of the user base in India. Many such offerings are already in the market today.
Comparing India’s overall corporate efficiency to that of China is ultimately futile. In fact, no two countries can be fairly compared due to differences in regulatory regimes, macroeconomic factors, and business culture between countries. But China’s, or for that matter, Japan’s, perseverance with their own languages to maintain productivity is a precedence worth emulating.
Another advantage of encouraging the use of one’s mother tongue in business communication could be the development of the mother tongue itself. Despite efforts by the government, Hindi and other major regional languages are not growing as dynamically as their counterparts in other countries. Being from Delhi, my Hindi is abundantly sprinkled with English words in regular conversation.
Try conducting a harmless social experiment. Ask people you meet – socially, professionally, and accidentally – if they know the Hindi translations of commonly used English words used by Hindi speakers. The more recent the phenomenon, the less likely that someone would know the translation. Hindi words for ‘internet’, ‘email’, or even the ‘coronavirus’ do not exist, and if they do, no one knows them. Meanwhile, a recent news article claimed that more than 1200 new German words related to the pandemic were coined in the past year. Why are no new terms being coined in Hindi? And why do we co-opt the English coinage wholesale into our languages? Lexical laziness is rampant.
Languages grow only if they create new words to accommodate new knowledge, as opposed to merely borrowing words from another language. Apart from the two most familiar languages in Newspapers – Hindi and Urdu, so is the English. In almost every sentence, their liberal use of English words written in Hindi or Urdu is pathetic and embarrassing. If journalists don’t stay true to the language they write in, what hope is there for the rest of us?
On the other hand, European, South American, African, and other Asian languages are dynamic and growing. As the use of computers became widespread, Latin languages came up with new words to refer to new technology. A computer is ‘el ordenador’ in Spanish, ‘ordenateur’ in French, both words roughly meaning ‘organizer’ in their respective languages. The Germans, though not known for their indolence, stayed with the English ‘computer’. Is there a Hindi word for a computer? Google tells me its ‘sanganak’, a word never uttered by a Hindi speaker. The language is not growing in any real sense.
Hindi has not been agile enough to incorporate new words for concepts like ‘router’, ‘double-breasted jacket’, ‘mobile phones’, or ‘hippies’. These are just some examples of concepts adopted into other languages by coinage and widespread use of their own words.
The Anglicisation of Indian languages has stagnated their development. A diminished sense of self-worth is the inevitable flip side of cultural mimicry of the West. For companies, an all-around embrace of Indianness is the only sure-fire ticket to productivity. This approach has worked everywhere else. Through widespread corporate use, Hindi and other regional languages can regain lost ground and begin a trajectory towards growth, boosting productivity of Indian companies in the process.
Sajid Ahmed is a Trustee of Hamdard Laboratories India (Foods) and the Treasurer of Hamdard National Foundation – HECA
