Print the Change : Go 3D

Who doesn't like Robert Rodriguez films? And, who doesn't love the movie-series ‘Spy Kids’? Here I am another fan of the series and would you care to guess my favorite gadget?

Yeah, yeah… All those spy-gadgets are cool, I know, but, the foodie in me won’t vote for any of them. I’ll go for the re-hydration machine that turns packaged articles into smoking hot McDonald burgers with just a spark! 

When I laze about, I just think in my mind… WOW! A single flicker and delicious fresh food in hand! And how I wished someday NASA will make it happen and I’ll be motivated to be an astronaut (or, even a kitchen plongeur for those culinary marvels). And, then a newsflash caught my eyes, PIZZA PLEASURE FOR ASTRONAUTS!! 

Not a drone/quadrocopter delivery from Domino’s but a garden-fresh one printed in space! PRINTED!!!

I confess being an easy-to-amaze person and a mere Telefax machine keeps me astounded till date but this is something which is ‘very very VERY’!

When I used this ‘Roman Holiday’ dialogue I couldn't avoid thinking of the protagonist, the timeless star Audrey Hepburn! I used to long for a breakfast date with the lovely and serendipitous ‘Holly Golightly’ at Madamme Tussauds. But it’s not a big deal these days as I can always own the exact same model now, thanks to 3D printing. All I’m gonna need is a few bucks, as low as  £30.

THE PRICE

In fact 3D printing has gone so cheap that people are printing plastic knobs of coffee mug lids  and all sorts of thingamajiggy with it. Even you can own a 3D printer of your own:

• Velleman K8200 3D Printer Kit uses electric energy 12V/3A at max., costs £700 and prints in plastic of 7 available colors; 1 kg of the plastic printing material costs £30.
• Open-source metal 3D printer costing less than $1,500 in parts is in the works at Michigan Technological University (MTU). You can easily assemble them to get your printer ready with a home-available tool-kit.
• Makerbot Replicator Mini is an entry-level 3D printer. The product, which is priced at $1,375, is designed with ease of use and simplicity in mind with a one-button interface and offers "plug and play" usability.
• The scope of 3D printers have already transcended the realm of utility, 3Doodler arrives in the form of a pen, allowing users to sketch objects in a 3D space, with the doodles they draw coming off the paper. 3Doodler is presently available at $99.
• 3D Systems Chefjet isn't your average 3D printer, either. Chefjet use sugar for 3D printing producing various sweet treats. However, Chefjet printers have a $5,000 starting price. 
• The LumiFold photopolymerisation 3D printer is both small and affordable. Most desktop 3D printers aren't small or portable, but a new LumiFold claims to be both – easily fits in a backpack and available for $400.

LumiFold photopolymerisation 3D printer - small and affordable
Photograph: Indiegogo

Can’t afford? Keep calm and outsource!

Many traders offer      'in store' 3D printing service besides retail giant Asda. The supermarket chain is trialing a new facility that allows shoppers to scan and replicate anything in ceramic. Shoppers can walk into the 3D scanning booth in Asda’s York store and replicate just about anything bigger than a shoe, including people and pets. The object is scanned within minutes in-store. The model is then sent to a specialist 3D printing company, which produces a ceramic print in up to 6m different colors at various sizes for as little as £40 within a few days shipping it back to the store, "ready to pick up with your next week's shopping".

Astonishing indeed, isn’t it?

Read More

Keep an Eye on Arvind Kejriwal

Let us go to the 'Mahabharata', the greatest epic of the Hindu civilization. We might start our discussion with Yudhisthira, the epitome of honesty and truthfulness. Yudhisthira never lied but once. According to the karma theory, he was duly punished. In the balance-sheet of his deeds for the part of sin show a single lie only, his penalty was limited to a momentary stay at the hell’s inferno.

Was it just an itsy-bitsy faux? Or was it a grievous one for which even the legend of truth, Yudhisthira, needed to go through salvation?

At this point I feel it’s worthy to go through the chronicle. Those who have a spiffing grasp of the epic saga can skip this paragraph at ease. All the Kourava brothers* had their combat training from Dronacharya, an invincible fighter himself and a great teacher. Dronacharya’s only weakness was his beloved son Ashwaththama. When the five Pandava brothers raised arms against the rest of the Kouravas, Dronacharya took the latter’s side (out of his bindings, not from will though). Dronacharya started taking heavy toll of the Pandava-soldiers, so he was ought to be deleted. But he was unvanquishable until he was weak. As his scion Ashwaththama was immortal, there was no choice left but to deceive Dronacharya that his junior is slain. So the Pandavas killed an elephant, which was a namesake of his son, and Yudhisthira heralded him “Ashwaththama hata iti gaja” (Ashwaththama, the elephant, is dead). The trick was to utter the part ‘iti gaja’ (the elephant) in an inaudible gamut. Shattered Drona lost his will to battle and was fallen instantly to a pawn, Dhristadumna.

Though Drona knew that his child could not be perished, he blindly believed in what he heard from Yudhisthira because Yudhisthira never lied in his life-time. The one discussed here, as you can see, is not a frank lie too, rather a half-truth. The wise veteran Dronacharya believed in it and got killed. So, he was not fallen to Drishtadumna who was nothing of a warrior compared to the legend, but to the ‘just a lie’ by Yudhisthira. 

The weapon was not the lie, on a second thought. Had anyone told the same, Drona would never believe. But he trusted the candor. So neither the blade of an assassin nor the lie took Dronacharya’s head. It is the ever truthful image of Yudhisthira, which slaughtered him. Here, the lie is not a Lilliput deviation from his virtue but a sheer modus operandi. I am not ascertaining that he has maintained this image to take the advantage of trust one day, but he had definitely used it in the above-mentioned case.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Depth: The Three Mistakes of Arvind Kejriwal

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now it is time to get to the moral of the story : clean image is not something to be trusted upon. Constant vigilance is required to deal with persons who flaunt this. Else, on one crucial day, one auspicious moment, if the candor show it as her/his most treasured and thunderous trump, we would simply have no choice but to give ourselves in like the duped Dronacharya.

 But none so far had learned the lesson. The commoners always had a knack to show their back to reality. They had always preferred a dream capsule to stay in, that makes them believe a Hero would come and will pull them up from their toiling; putting an end to all evils, the famine, fever and follies. This ingrained delusion is dangerously prevalent among the mango people and is no less than a pandemic. Examples are scattered across the globe: 

• Muammar Gaddafi, the 'brother leader' of Libya; 
• Robespierre, the instrumental figure of French Revolution (advocated against death penalty when he was chosen as the leader and was called "The Incorruptible" but is better remembered as the ‘dictateur sanguinaire’ (bloodthirsty dictator) of the Reign of Terror, which ended after his execution in July 1794);
• Napoléon Bonaparte, the 'son-of-revolution', trusted by the French people to end the Reign of Terror, turned out autocratic;
• Adolf Hitler, a decorated war hero, the Prussian youth-icon;
• Fidel Castro, the  communist revolutionary and apple of Cuban eyes (proved to be an economic flop).

 Still many Indians believe that if Subhas Chandra Bose comes back, India will turn into the best place in this world, overnight. (Do not take me wrong, I am not questioning Bose's achievements and abilities but slamming the silly faith that if the Hero runs the country, there will be no corruption despite people taking bribes like they are doing and so on. ) 

 We must keep in mind that Rome was not built in a day. The lesson from history is, therefore, DO NOT lay your trust upon Arvind Kejriwal or any other corruption crusader or Hero incongruously. Their show-off might be a master-trick to get the throne. Hence, in lieu of lime-light I strongly recommend a search-light for Arvind Kejriwal & his Aam Aadmi Party.

* Kourava means all the descendents of Kuru, the forefather of  Vichitravirya, the legal (not biological) parent of Dhritarashtra & Pandu. The five sons of Pandu were collectively called pancha pandava (five heirs of Pandu). But, after all they were also Kouravas. So, it is a common mistake to utter  that 'Kurukshetra War' was between Kauravas and Pandavas. Rather the battling sides were Pandavas and rest of the Kauravas, both with their alleys.

Sunabha Ghosh (Executive Editor)

About the Author:

Sunabha Ghosh is co-founder and the current executive editor of The Analyst.

Join him on: Facebook | Twitter

Read More

"What is Sanskrit?" - A Pathetic Case of Dereliction

  In our previous article of this series "Why an Indian Must Learn a 'Dead Language' Called Sanskrit '", we have explored the befits of learning Sanskrit, and tried to prove why all INDIANS, irrespective of cast, creed or religion MUST learn it. At the concluding part, we had also strongly advocated the case of Sanskrit as the National Language of India. But ironically, the word which suits best with the attitude of Govt. of India (along with a significant portion of so-called intellectuals) towards Sanskrit, is not 'indifference' (let alone 'respect'), not even 'negligence', but 'dereliction'. In this piece, we would take an attempt to discuss that piteous story.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The First Part: Why an Indian Must Learn a 'Dead Language' Called Sanskrit 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, if anyone asks me - "What is Sanskrit?" (I am damn afraid that after 20 years, it would be a forgotten Language, literally, and Indian children would ask their parents this question), I cannot go by the well-written Wikipedia definition ("Sanskrit is a historical Indo-Aryan language, the primary liturgical language of Hinduism and a literary and scholarly language in Buddhism and Jainism"). My answer would be stupidly  simple - Sanskrit? It is a pathetic case of dereliction.

Okay, let's not get emotional at this point. Let's start our story with a quote of our Honorable Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh - 

Read More

Why an Indian Must Learn a 'Dead Language' Called Sanskrit

"If I was asked what is the greatest treasure which India possesses and what is her greatest heritage, I would answer unhesitatingly that it is the Sanskrit language and literature and all that it contains. This is a magnificent inheritance, and so long as this endures and influences the life of our people, so long will the basic genius of India continue."

---  Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru (Quoted from The Discovery of India)

Starting an article which will deal with the need of Sanskrit (संस्कृत) education with a quote of Pandit Nehru, I think a good idea. I am not saying (neither agreeing, nor denying) that he is the best person around the globe to comment on it. But I think, if I do so, at least, people would not label me as a 'biased' or communal person. Yes, today 'Sanskrit' is also a communal word  like 'Saffron'- the credit obviously goes to the some of the eminent columnists and journalists. (I often wonder how easily something can be tagged with 'communal' or 'secular' in today's India; but lets not go into that right now. Let us first focus on our core issue).

Rigveda in Devanagari (image via Wikipedia)

There are debates (probably more than enough to confuse anyone) on whether Sanskrit can be called a dead language or not. Many a scholar has given their own outlooks. And almost every opinion added a new dimension to the problem and made it more critical to solve.

 Prof. Sheldon Pollock was the famous one who tried to prove that Sanskrit is a dead language and tried to discover the reasons behind it in his paper "The Death of Sanskrit". He wrote on the very first paragraph of it: 

  "In the age of Hindu identity politics (Hindutva) inaugurated in the 1990s by the ascendancy of the Indian People's Party (Bharatiya Janata Party) and its ideological auxiliary, the World Hindu Council (Vishwa Hindu Parishad), Indian cultural and religious nationalism has been promulgating ever more distorted images of India's past. Few things are as central to this revisionism as Sanskrit, the dominant culture language of precolonial southern Asia outside the Persianate order. Hindutva propagandists have sought to show, for example, that Sanskrit was indigenous to India, and they purport to decipher Indus Valley seals to prove its presence two millennia before it actually came into existence. In a farcical repetition of Romantic myths of primevality, Sanskrit is considered—according to the characteristic hyperbole of the VHP—the source and sole preserver of world culture." 

He had identified four major reasons (or cases, to be specific) behind this 'death' - 

• The disappearance of Sanskrit literature in Kashmir. 

• The decreased use of it in sixteenth-century Vijayanagara.

• The short-lived moment of modernity of Sanskrit at the Mughal court in mid-seventeenth-century Delhi. 

• It's loss of importance completely in Bengal on the eve of colonialism.

He even compared this scenario with the death of Latin  - 

Both died slowly, and earliest as a vehicle of literary expression, while much longer retaining significance for learned discourse with its universalist claims. Both were subject to periodic renewals or forced rebirths, sometimes in connection with a politics of translocal aspiration... At the same time... both came to be ever more exclusively associated with narrow forms of religion and priestcraft, despite centuries of a secular aesthetic.

 [The complete paper can be downloaded for free from Columbia University Website. I may not agree with him, but I have to say, it is an interesting read] 

Obviously, there is a class of scholar who very strongly objected Prof. Pollock's view. The most noted criticism probably came from Prof. J. Hanneder. He explicitly wrote in his paper On "The Death of Sanskrit"  (published in Indo-Iranian Journal) - 

On a more public level the statement that Sanskrit is a dead language is misleading, for Sanskrit is quite obviously not as dead as other dead languages and the fact that it is spoken, written and read will probably convince most people that it cannot be a dead language in the most common usage of the term. Pollock’s notion of the “death of Sanskrit” remains in this unclear realm between academia and public opinion when he says that “most observers would agree that, in some crucial way, Sanskrit is dead”

[This paper may seems to be more fascinating for someone, but unfortunately subscriber access to Indo-Iranian Journal is necessary to read this.]

Again, noted scholar (UC Berkeley alum) and President medal winner Ram Karan Sharma also thinks that it is quite unjustified to label Sanskrit as a dead language. He said during a national convention on "Sanskrit language, literature and education" organised by Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, 

 "...not withstanding the fact that Sanskrit has been used from time immemorial, even now Bihar's languages and dialects are using Sanskritic derivatives, like "eso" in Bhojpuri comes from the Sanskrit word "aishmah" and "chichiana" (again Bhojpuri) from the Sanskrit word "shishyanan" referring to fire, although few people can correlate the two easily. This can be found in all Indian languages."

 But discussing on which opinion is to be voted up, is the last thing that I want to do with this piece of post (As I believe, a blog is hardly a suitable place to criticize some peer-reviewed content). I have put the points and counter-points only to prove that there is still huge scope of discussion in this question. For the sake of further discussion here, let me agree with intellectuals like Prof. Pollock up to this point i.e. they have done an absolutely right job by labeling Sanskrit as 'dead language'. 

But, if we explore Prof. Pollock's article some more, we would see, during his venture to discover the reasons of that death, he has gone beyond this. His points are - 

1.  Sanskrit is dead as it is hardly used today.

2. After the period of Zain-ul-Abidin creation of original literary verse in Sanskrit became rare. It was reduced to reinscription and restatements of ideas already explored, and any creativity in Sanskrit was restricted to hymns. It indicates the 'brain-death' of Sanskrit. In his words,

What was lost was something more elusive but more central to the life of a culture: the ability to create new literature.

3. Sanskrit is a out-of-date language which cannot go with today's world. Or even it is used, that would be limited to literary verses and nothing else). He tried to provide logic behind this also. For example, in one place, he wrote - 

During the course of this vernacular millennium, as I have called it, Sanskrit, the idiom of a cosmopolitan literature, gradually died, in part because cosmopolitan talk made less and less sense in an increasingly regionalized world. 

Now my main objection is here. From now onward, we will try to find out why we cannot be satisfied with his third argument, why we have to revive Sanskrit even if we consider it as a 'dead language' and why Sanskrit is a MUST, even in this twenty first century. 

Brain Exercise - Advantage of Devanagari Script:

 The first point which gives Sanskrit an edge over many other languages is its script. Usually Sanskrit is written in Devanagari. A recent research by the scientists of National Brain Research Centre (NBRC) have discovered that reading Devanagari involves more areas of human brain than Roman Scripts (please note, English uses a roman script). That means learning Sanskrit is a good exercise for human brain.According to them, In Devanagari, consonants are written in a linear left-to-right order and vowel signs are positioned above, below or on either side of the consonants. As a result, the vowel precedes the consonant in writing certain words but follows it in speech making it a unique script. "Our results suggest bilateral activation-participation from both left and right hemispheres of the brain-for reading phrases in Devanagari", they concluded [Source: India Today Report].

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Last Part of this article: "What is Sanskrit?" - A Pathetic Case of Dereliction

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Knowledge of Sanskrit Helps One in Learning English: 

It is now seen that knowledge in Sanskrit accelerates the learning of English (Please note, though we had strongly advocated for vernacular as the medium of instruction in school level previously, we never deny the importance of English at a time when we are residing in a global village). This news may astonish someone on the first glance. But, we need to keep in mind that  it has a perfect grammar and nicely-built structure. Once KWH Schlegel, an eminent German critic, said (in his book History of Literature, p. 117) -"Justly it is called Sanskrit, i.e. perfected, finished.....The Sanskrit combines these various qualities, possessed separately by other tongues: Grecian copiousness, deep-toned Roman force, the divine afflatus characterizing the Hebrew tongue."

 Probably, that's why if someone learn Sanskrit properly, he can learn English quickly. Ficino School in Mt Eden area of Auckland (a school in New Zealand) has experimented with it and found that Sanskrit provides a roadmap for understanding English. Besides giving a clear view of the structure of language, it also heightens "their awareness of the process of speech, creating a greater understanding of and ability to, enunciate words clearly."

We can shift our look from southern hemisphere to northern, but scenario doesn't change at all. As St. James School (a school at London where Sanskrit is compulsory at the age of 11) teacher tells, apart from the fact that the children are immensely benefited afterwards in learning English , the  most note-worthy point is they ENJOY learning Sanskrit. Though I have not experimented with a pool of students, still from my personal experience, I can bet, not only for English, but the learning curve for Bengali or Hindi would be easy for a child if he learn Sanskrit first.

One Step Towards Spiritual Upliftment: 

The advantage of learning Sanskrit is obviously not limited to the advantage of learning English. In fact, it is a bold step towards becoming a 'perfect man'. Quoting Rutger Kortenhorst, a Sanskrit teacher in the John Scottus School in Dublin, we can advice any parent:
"The qualities of Sanskrit will become the qualities of your child- that is the mind and heart of your child will become beautiful, precise and reliable. Sanskrit automatically teaches your child and anybody else studying it to pay FINE attention due to its uncanny precision. When the precision is there the experience is, that it feels uplifting. It makes you happy. It is not difficult even for a beginner to experience this. All you have to do is fine-tune your attention and like music you are drawn in and uplifted. This precision of attention serves all subjects, areas and activities of life both while in school and for the rest of life." (Courtesy: Dr. Anuradha Chaudry).

Practical Advantages: 

If someone does not know Sanskrit, he is obviously missing something. He cannot get the clear perspective of Vedas, Geeta, Upanishads, Ramayana, Mahabharata, Arthashashtra and many other books, which are till regarded as the finest piece by a large portion of our society (Translated versions almost always create a wall behind the reader and the original book).

Even to be a master of subjects like Ayurvedic Medicine, Yoga, Indian philosophy, Vedic Mathematics or Astrology, one need to know Sanskrit to some extent.

Sanskrit - the Best Language for Computer:

 Yes, one can be astonished, but this is probably true. In near future NASA is going to use Sanskrit as a computer Language.

NASA is Going to use Sanskrit as Computer Language

NASA scientist Rick Briggs discussed why Sanskrit is one of the best language for use in computer long ago (in 1985) in his paper Knowledge Representation in Sanskrit and Artificial Intelligence. According to him, Sanskrit is the natural language in which a message can be sent by the computer in the least number   of words. Three excerpts from that paper, I find particularly worth-mentioning.
            

*There is at least one language, Sanskrit, which for the duration of almost 1000 years was a living spoken language with a considerable literature of its own Besides works of literary value, there was a long philosophical and grammatical tradition that has continued to exist with undiminished vigor until the present century. Among the accomplishments of the grammarians can be reckoned a method for paraphrasing Sanskrit in a manner that is identical not only in essence but in with current work in Artificial Intelligence...a natural language can serve as an artificial language also, and that much work in AI has been reinventing a wheel millenia old.

**...The reasoning of these authors is couched in a style of language that had been developed especially to formulate logical relations with scientific precision. It is a terse, very condensed form of Sanskrit, which paradoxically at times becomes so abstruse that a commentary is necessary to clarify it.

***It should be pointed out that these Sanskrit Grammatical Scientists actually wrote and talked this way. The domain for this type of language was the equivalent of today's technical journals. In their ancient journals and in verbal communication with each other they used this specific, unambiguous form of Sanskrit in a remarkably concise way.

Sanskrit as a Career Option: 

Sanskrit is recognized as 'mother of all languages' throughout the greater portion of the world. Even if you aiming for a bright career only, Sanskrit can provide it, till today. Harvard to Cambridge, Oxford to Trinity college Dublin - you can end up with a faculty post in some highly ranked universities.

Mode of Hindu Survival: 

Sanskrit and only Sanskrit is the language which should bubbles up in our mind  even if we merely think about Hindu Survival. Probably, it is needless to mention that if Hindus want to revive their past glory, the first thing which comes into mind is the unification of Hindus. And if Hindus really want to think that "Our sole identity is we are Hindu", they need some common points. Only religion and some rituals cannot satisfy the criteria. And the first common platform where all Hindus have to arrive is the Language (If someone consider Bangladesh Liberation War, he would get a clear perspective on how language matters). And this language cannot be anything but Sanskrit.

One may question - Why not Hindi, Bengali, Marathi, Tamil, Telugu or something like that. The answer lies in the question itself. Which one you would choose? Apparently the best option is obviously Hindi (with may be Bengali with a ~83 million native speakers).

 First we remember that day, when Dr. Rajendra Prasad, cast the deciding vote in favor of Hindi (as the link language) in the Constituent Assembly , to the detriment of the other candidate, Sanskrit. But if we see at the national and international picture, we can easily identify that Hindi is NOT well-accepted in a large portion of Hindus. Till today, the greater portion of educated speakers of Bengali, Telugu or Tamil consider Hindi as a vulgar language. That's why most of the Hindu children whose mother-tongue is not Hindi, didn't go for Hindi education. And they also question - Why should I learn Hindi? Is it better than my mother-tongue? 

The case is worst for mixed families (pretty common practice today if someone considers the NRI families). Their child often don't know any Indian Language. They learn English only, which is basically a Foreign Language. If we want to introduce another languages, unmistakably it would be a massive failure. But Sanskrit may not be. 

The greater portion of Hindus still have enough sympathy for Sanskrit. And, for almost all Hindus, learning Sanskrit is a difficult or easy job to the same extent. Dr. Koenraad Elst rightly said in his article "Hindu Survival: What Is to Be Done"- 
 Still Sanskrit is the only chance the lovers of India have. Hindi failed, and English will only weaken Indian unity, apart  from being an utterly undignified choice of link language.

In fact, if you extend our discussion a bit, we can discover that Sanskrit is not only a way of Hindu Survival, rather it is the best option for national language. Let me quote Naziruddin Ahmed, a Muslim League leader, who openly advocated for Sanskrit - 

“I offer you a language which is the grandest and the greatest, and it is impartially difficult, equally difficult for all to learn."

 [Source: Constituent Assembly Debates 1334, quoted in Ramaswamy, 354-355, via 
International Forum for India's Heritage]

There are many strong arguments in favor of  Sanskrit. And I think, most of them are nicely discussed in a chapter of 'The Wonder That was Sanskrit' book. In a paper, Prof. Makarand Paranjape (Professor of English at JNU) also finely tried to establish the case of Sanskrit as India's national Language. I have tried to sum-up the arguments:

• Only a language that is native to a country, that is, a language that has taken birth and developed in a particular country, can be the national language of that country. English, though wide-spread, doesn't satisfy this criteria.

• India's national language has to be one which is not regional. Sanskrit is alone non-regional. No province or state or people can claim it as its own.

•  Though Sanskrit has no regional identity, still it had served as a link-language. English cannot be the binding force between well-educated and illiterate India. Again, Hindi also can create mere division. Between native and non-native Hindi speakers. 
• Again, in contradistinction to English, Sanskrit is the “mother” of most Indian tongues. All these including Tamil have a large percentage of words derived from Sanskrit. Sanskrit through the well known processes of Tatsam (words borrowed as they are from Sanskrit) and Tadbhava (words derived from Sanskrit but modified), it is estimated that almost 70% of the words of most modern Indian languages are from Sanskrit. That is why it is possible for people in India from different parts of India to understand each other even if they speak different languages. After all, there is a common vocabulary not to speak of a great deal of similarities in syntax. 
• Sanskrit is change with the times, and it can produce an infinite variety of new words. Again these words can enrich the vocabulary of modern Indian languages.  

A table on that paper simply nailed all Sanskrit-phobic childish arguments. It is really worth sharing [So, I took a screenshot of that and adding it here]. 

In conclusion, we can say that it is Sanskrit which can be the common platform of communication. Through it, we can feel that we, Indians, irrespective of cast, creed or religion are brothers. And at the same time, we can take pride in our magnificent past culture. So, Sanskrit is not basically the best option, rather it is the ONLY option. In the current situation, where none has "national language of India" tag, Govt. of India should put it on Sanskrit. And of course, sooner is better.  


Now, considering the entire scenario, in my opinion, it would be a sin, if someone, being an Indian, doesn't learn Sanskrit or show enough audacity to to neglect it's importance. But, this is one of the common practices among a section of shameless Indians. But, that is a different story. And we will discuss that in detail in the next article.

Read More

Delhi Gang Rape: Society Missed Key Issues In Much Ado

 It is exactly 45 times the sun arose with the hope to see a day more innocuous and parabolized under the horizon with poignant ignominy and anguish after the appallingly atrocious incident of Delhi stained a black spot on the Elysian plume of Mother India.

There are thousands (21413 in 2009 and 24270 in 2011 as per Crimes in India statistics published by National Crime Records Bureau, Ministry of Home Affairs; look at page 397 in both reports) of such incidents taking place throughout India, at a ‘happening’ rate of 1 per 30 minute and one per every 14 hours in the capital itself, but somehow the Delhi incident has managed to blow up the whistle. It generated huge mass mobilization around Delhi and all other places in India. Shame and protest is avowed at the international level too. The Wikipedia coverage totted up to the infamy; even Google lit a candle 'in memory of the Delhi brave-heart'. 

Read More

The Uncut Press-Conference of MS Dhoni

Sticking to the tradition of losing (well, there were one or two totally  unintentional accidental cases, where India won – but you have to note –  that did not affect the result of the entire series at all), today Indian National Cricket team under Shri Mahendra Singh Dhoni loses another ODI against England. After the match, Dhoni was kind enough to come in the press conference.  And he came, he saw and he conquered.

This reporter of The Analyst was one of the fortunate ones, who attended it. He strongly repeats his statement when he was asked whether he would step down. “NEVER!” was his single word answer.  And he has then furnished some superb cutting-edge logic.

“Cricket is a team game, just like politics. When Congress lost the battle of Uttar Pradesh, there was Digvijaya Singh to take the responsibility on his shoulder. Remember, Rahul Gandhi was the captain of the campaign. Still Diggy did so. If I don’t have someone like Diggy in my team, what can I do?” – Dhoni simply knocked-out the journo by these words.

Read More