chief editor - brennencollege.ac.inbrennencollege.ac.in/ml/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/brennrn... ·...

2Brennen Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies 2008

Chief Editor

M. Vijayalakshmi, Principal

Editor

T. Ravindran, Department of Physics

Editorial Board

K. V. Surendran, Department of English

M. Ramakrishnan, Department of Philosophy

P. N. Sathyanathan, Department of Chemistry

V. Kumaran, Department of Hindi

S. Vijayamma, Department of Hindi

Type Setting and Printing: Computer Centre, Government Brennen

College, Thalassery

For Private Circulation only

E-mail: [email protected]

Website:www.brennencollege.org


Editorial

Government Brennen College, one of the premier institutions of

higher education in Kerala, was founded by Edward Brennen, a master

attendant of Thalassery Port. It developed out of the Free School

established in 1862 by Brennen. It was elevated to the status of a Second

Grade College with F. A. classes in 1890. The College has been identified

as a Centre of Excellence by the Government of Kerala. It is affiliated to

Kannur University. The College was accredited by NAAC with B++Grade in

2004.

The College offers Degree Programmes in sixteen disciplines and

Post Graduate Courses in nine subjects. The departments of English,

Malayalam, Hindi, Sanskrit and Economics, Physics and Philosophy are

approved Research Centres of Kannur University. The College works with

a mission of making distinctive and distinguished contributions to the cause

of higher education. It was a long cherished dream of the College to bring

out a Research Journal. The dream was fulfilled in June 2004 when the first

number of ‘Brennen Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies’ was published.The

present number of the journal contains research articles from different

disciplines. The journal is intended to encourage and develop research

activities among students and teachers. Suggestions for improvements

are most welcome.

Editor


CONTENTS

1. On Feminist Literary Theory

K. V. Surendran 1

2. ¨ÉÉxÉ´É <iÉxÉÉ PÉ¨ÉÆb÷ CªÉÉå Eò®úiÉÉ ?

´ÉÒ.EÖò¨ÉÉ®úxÉ 13

3. xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ EòÒ Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ EòÉ´ªÉoùÎ¹] õ iÉlÉÉ ‘ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ BEò ®úÉiÉ’

BºÉ.Ê´ÉVÉªÉ¨¨ÉÉ 20

4. Electrical Conductivity in Solids

K. M. Remya and T. Ravindran 29

5. The Potential Role of Aerosols in Retrieving the

Dynamics of Atmosphere

K. M. Praseed, K. Rathnakaran, Sheela M Joseph and

M. K. Satheesh Kumar 37

6. “The Buddha is in Every One”

The Ecoethics of Buddhism

M. Ramakrishnan 49

7. A Reappraisal of Sartre’s ‘Subject’ in its Relation to

Postmodernism

Vijayakumari Valappil 55


Women’s studies are distinguished by their focus on women, women’s

experience and the nature of relationships between the sexes. By placing

women at the centre of intellectual inquiry, women’s studies offer a new

perspective on the world. Though women’s studies have a specific focus

on women, they are critical instruments to study reality from the stand point

of women. They treat women as a category in a multidisciplinary approach

in order to incorporate women’s experiences and understandings. They

begin with the explicit concern for the removal of gender subordination

and discrimination. Women’s studies developed as part of a political project

seeking to establish the rigorous and scholarly study of women in order to

change their position. As multi - disciplinary studies, they aim at providing

a holistic view of society, through an objective and critical inquiry and at

filling the deficiencies in the understanding of social reality. In this paper

an attempt is made to look at feminism both as a literary theory and as a

political movement.

The basic view of feminism is that Western civilization is pervasively

patriarchal or male- centred. It is organized and conducted in such a way

as to subordinate women to men in all cultural domains: familial, religious,

political, economic, social, legal and artistic. It is also held that while one’s

sex is determined by anatomy, the prevailing concepts of gender are largely

cultural constructs with patriarchal biases. There is a further claim that

patriarchal ideology pervades those writings which have been considered

great literature. Thus the most highly regarded literary works focus on

male protagonists like Oedipus, Ulysses, Hamlet, Captain Ahab and so on.

K. V. SURENDRAN

Post Graduate Department of English and Research Centre

ON FEMINIST LITERARY THEORY


Feminism as a philosophy of life seeks to reform the deep rooted

causes of women’s oppression. In other words, it is raising the consciousness

of an entire culture. One of the main issues is the question of gender and

its social and cultural implications. Simone de Beauvoir in the Second Sex

observes that women’s behaviour patterns that are associated with females

are creations of society. However, she goes on to say that there is an

“irreducible biological difference between men and women” (13). Most

feminists feel that the woman’s capacity for pregnancy and child birth has

had some influence on their psyche and their social position. Shultamith

Firestone, a radical feminist, argues in The Dialectic of Sex that the biological

capacity to reproduce is the main reason for women’s social oppression

(197-198).

One can perhaps argue that feminist criticism was inaugurated in

the 1960s. But it was the result of two centuries of struggle for women’s

rights marked by works like Mary Wollstonecraft’s A Vindication of the

Rights of Woman (1792),John Stuart Mill’s The Subjection of Women (1869)

etc. Virginia Woolf’s A Room of One’s Own and numerous other essays on

women are also to be mentioned here. A much more radical critical mode

was launched by Simone de Beauvoir through her path breaking work The

Second Sex (1949). In Sexual Politics (1969) Kate Millet represents Western

social arrangements and institutions as covert ways of manipulating power

so as to establish the dominance of men and the subordination of women.

A major interest of feminist critics has been to reconstitute all the

ways we deal with literature so as to do justice to female points of view,

concerns and values. A number of feminists have concentrated on what

Elaine Showalter calls gynocriticism, that is, a criticism which concerns itself

with developing a specifically female framework for dealing with works

written by women. An important goal of feminist critics has been to enlarge

and reorder the literary canon. Helene Cixous posits the existence of an

incipient ‘feminine writing’ (ecriture feminine) which has its source in the


mother, in that stage of the mother-child relation before the child acquires

the male-centred verbal language.

The term ‘first wave’ feminism is used to refer to the late nineteenth

century movements that led to the enfranchisement of women, in Britain.

The women’s right movement emerged in America with the Seneca Falls

Convention of 1848. Women came forward to claim the rights of liberty

and equality. Women were denied the vote in Western democracies what

made Mary Wollstonecraft argue: “I really think that women ought to have

representatives, instead of being arbitrarily governed without having any

direct share allowed them in the deliberations of government” (166).

Since 1969 there has been an explosion of feminist writings which

almost displayed the urgency and excitement of a religious awakening.

The ‘second wave’ of feminist movement started in the nineteen sixties.

The women not only agitated for political equality but also concerned

themselves with their position in the work place, and in the family. This

phase of feminism came to be perceived as simply anti-family, anti-

marriage, anti-children and so on. Women were actually opposing the

excessive restraints that marriage and motherhood imposed upon them.

The second wave of feminism encouraged the individual’s right to discover

the kind of person he or she is and to try to become that person without

conforming to any norms laid down by society.

Showalter is of the view that the third phase of feminist criticism

demanded a revision of the accepted theoretical assumptions about reading

and writing that have been based entirely on male literary experiences.

Post modernism heralded an era of theory, which stated that the human

subject had disappeared from fiction. Feminism is in the process of

assembling an identity out of the recognition that women need to discover

and must fight for a sense of unified selfhood. “Feminism does not want to

establish the woman author as an icon. Yet, since the woman author has


barely entered literary history feminism cannot risk losing her” (Eagleton,

Working with Feminist Criticism, 75).

It is difficult to call oneself a feminist without classifying the type of

feminism one believes in. According to Freedman, feminisms can be

loosely classified into three categories – Radical feminism, Liberal feminism

and Marxist feminism. Radical feminists claim that the roots of women’s

oppression are biological. Liberal feminists, who do not advocate radical

changes would like to alter the lives of women through legal measures.

Marxist feminists view the oppression of women as historically a direct

result of the institutions of private property. Apart from these there are

other types of feminisms like Ecofeminism, Semio feminism, Cultural

feminism, Black feminism and Post colonial feminism.

It should be noted that these feminisms do not move in water tight

compartments. Thus Eco feminism and Marxist feminism share certain

common views. Eco feminism is a critique of capitalist domination and

exploitation. It picks out the patriarchal aspects of the existing social system

as the main target of attack. In Ariel Salleh’s words, the movement puts up

fight against “the eurocentric patriarchal capitalist exploitation of natural

resources of women and of indigenous people” (12 - 13). Its emphasis is

on the emancipatory agenda of exposing the oppressive dimensions of

patriarchy and liberating women as well as nature from the irrational

excesses of patriarchal capitalist system. In spite of recognizing feminism

as an ally in the battle against patriarchal domination eco feminists accuse

the feminists of being in ‘complicity with the Western androcentric

colonisation’.

Though feminisms are multiple, the basic ideology, which underlies

them, is the same. “The secondary status of women in society is one of the

true universals, a pan – cultural fact”, observes Sherry Ortner (21). But

within feminism itself there are a lot of ideological issues on which there is


no common consensus. The various feminisms, however, share some

assumptions that constitute a common ground.

Feminist theory is not monolithic in approach. It is interdisciplinary

in nature. Linguistics, Psychoanalysis, Marxism, Structuralism, Post

colonialism and New Historicism have provided feminist critical theory with

important analytical tools. Until recently, feminist and post colonial theory

have followed ‘a path of convergent evolution’ (Ashcroft et al., 1995, 249).

Both theories have concerned themselves with the study and defence of

marginalized ‘others’ within respective structures of domination. They

began with an attempt to invert prevailing hierarchies of gender/ culture/

race.

Both Feminist theory and post colonial theory try to reinstate the

marginalised in the face of the dominant. They question forms

incorporated in literature. Both theories engage in the process of re-

reading classical texts. Also, both the theories look forward to the future

envisaging societies in which inequalities are minimized. It is a fact that

women’s experience and women’s writing cannot be totally cut away from

the other world. “The radical demand that would yoke women writers to

feminist evolution and deny them the freedom to explore new subjects

would obviously not provide a healthy direction for female tradition to take”

(Showalter, A Literature of Their Own, 318).

Leela Gandhi observes that there are three areas of controversy

“which fracture the potential unity between post colonialism and feminism”

(83). They are the debate surrounding the figure of the ‘third-world woman’,

the problematic history of the ‘feminist –as –imperialist’ and the colonialist

deployment of ‘feminist criteria’. The issue of ‘double colonisation’ is often

associated with third-world woman. The representation of the average

third-world woman as “ignorant, poor, uneducated, tradition-bound,

domesticated, family–oriented victimised, facilitates and privileges the

self-representation of Western women as educated, modern, as having


control over their own bodies and “sexualities” and the “freedom” to make

their own decisions”, observes Talpade Mohanty (1994, 200). Women

loyally accepted their share of the white people’s burden and lightened

the weight of it with their quite humour, their grace and often their youth,

says Barr (1976, 103). The traumatic nationalist negotiation of the ‘woman

question’ establishes a direct and problematic enmity between ‘brown men’

and ‘white women’.

Early feminists were concerned with social and political upheaval.

With the advent of the nineteen eighties there was a breakthrough in

feminist critical theory. Feminist critics examined representation of women

in standard literary works. They held that representation of women were

also strictly literary devices. As has been observed by feminist critics the

experience of feminist critical enlightenment transformed all that went

before it. It was an intellectual revolution aimed at violating existing

paradigms and discovering a new ‘world’.

Feminist criticism has mirrored feminist politics in accepting its

diversity. It accepts within itself divergent and contradictory views. “There

is no Mother of feminist criticism, no fundamental work against which one

can measure other feminisms ... It is not limited or even partial to single

national literature, genre or century, it is interdisciplinary in theory and

practice” (Showalter, quoted in Meaney’s (Un) Like Subjects,1). But Third-

world feminists have objected to being included in Western feminism when

their experiences have been different. According to them, Western

feminism suffers from ethnocentric bias in presuming that the solutions,

which white women have advocated in their oppression are equal to all.

The woman as the racial other was doubly marginalized by both imperial

ideology and native hierarchies.

Showalter has distinguished between two forms of feminist criticism.

The first type is concerned with woman as reader. This is referred to as


“feminist critique”. The second type deals with woman as writer. Showalter

refers to this as “gynocritics”. Feminist critique concerns itself with the

way women read literature produced by men. Gynocritics deals with

“.....scholarship concerned with woman as the producer of textual meaning,

with the history, themes, genres and structures of literature by

women”(Showalter, “Towards a Feminist Poetics”, 128). The concept of

gynocritics helps one to understand what women have felt and

experienced. Its concern is woman as writer – woman as producer of

meaning. It focuses exclusively on female culture. It assumes that there

must be a connection between the writer’s gender and her/his literary out

put. “Gynocritics is ... historical in its orientation, it looks at women’s writing

as it has actually occurred and tries to define its specific characteristics of

language, genre and literary influence within a cultural network that

includes variables of race, clan and nationality” (Showalter, “Women’s Time,

Women’s Space”, 36).

The ‘Images of Women’ approach to literature has proved to be an

extremely fertile branch of feminist criticism. In this approach, the act of

reading is seen as a communication between the life (‘experience’) of the

author and the life of the reader. “When the reader becomes a critic, her

duty is to present an account of her own life that will enable her readers to

become aware of the position from which she speaks. Such an emphasis

upon the reader’s right to learn about the writer’s experience strongly

supports the basic feminist contention that no critism is ‘value-free’. As

Toril Moi observes “the image of women in literature is invariably defined

in opposition to the ‘real person’ whom literature somehow never quite

manages to convey to the reader” (44). She is of the view that feminists

must be able to account for the paradoxically productive aspects of

patriarchal ideology as well as for its obvious oppressive implications.

Anglo – American feminist critics have been mostly indifferent or

even hostile towards literary theory, which they have often regarded as a


hopelessly abstract ‘male’ activity. This attitude is gradually changing. One

of the first texts to break the theoretical silence among feminist critics was

Annette Kolodny’s “Some notes on defining a ‘feminist literary criticism’”

where she treats the study of women’s writing as a separate category.

However, Kolodny’s intervention in the theoretical debate does not pay

much attention to the role of politics in critical theory. Feminists must also

conduct a political and theoretical evaluation of the various methods and

tools on offer, to make sure that they don’t backfire on them. Toril Moi

affirms that “the central paradox of Anglo – American feminist criticism is

that “despite its often strong explicit political engagement, it is in the end

not quite political enough; not in the sense that it fails to go far enough

along the political spectrum, but in the sense that its radical analysis of

sexual politics still remains entangled with depoliticizing theoretical

paradigms” (86).

The new generation of French feminist theorists have rejected

Simone de Beauvoir’s existentialist feminism entirely. Turning away from

Beauvoir’s liberal desire for equality with men, these feminists have

emphasized difference. It is largely due to the efforts of Helene Cixous

that the question of an ecriture feminine came to occupy a central position

in the political and cultural debate in France in the 1970s. One of her most

accessible ideas is her analysis of ‘patriarchal binary thought’. Under the

heading ‘Where is she?’ Cixous lines up the following list of binary

oppositions:

Activity / Passivity

Sun / Moon

Day / Night

Father / Mother

Head / Emotions

Intelligible / Sensitive

Logos / Pathos


Each opposition can be analyzed as a hierarchy where the ‘feminine’ side

is always seen as the negative, powerless instance. Cixous denounces such

an equation of femininity with passivity. She proclaims woman as the source

of life, power and energy and hails the advent of a new, feminine language

that ceaselessly subverts these patriarchal binary schemes which oppress

and silence women. Against any binary scheme of thought Cixous sets

multiple, heterogeneous difference, the concept of which, is to be read along

with Derrida’s concept of differance. In the opposition masculine /feminine,

each term only achieves significance through its structural relationship to

the other. ‘Masculine’ would be meaningless without its direct opposite

‘feminine’ and vice versa. All meaning would be produced in this way.

However, for Derrida meaning is achieved though the ‘free play of the

signifier’.

A major concern of the feminists has been sex differences and

similarities in language use, in speech and non verbal communication. In

Man Made Language Dale Spender asserts: “The English language has

been literally man made and... it is still primarily under male control...This

monopoly over language is one of the means by which males have ensured

their own primacy, and consequently have ensured the invisibility or ‘other’

nature of females, and this primacy is perpetuated while women continue

to use, unchanged, the language which we have inherited” (12). The

question of sexism is a question of the power relationship between the sexes,

and this power struggle will be part of the context of all utterances under

patriarchy. The fact that feminists have managed to fight back have already

made many people feel uncomfortable in using the generic ‘he’ or ‘man’,

have questioned the use of words like ‘chairman’ and ‘spokesman’.

Kristeva, the French feminist will be remembered for her

commitment to thorough theoretical investigation of the problems of

marginality and subversion and her radical deconstruction of the identity

of the subject. Her theory of language allows us to examine both women’s


and men’s writing from an anti-humanist, anti-essentialist perspective. She

had a feminist vision of a society in which the sexual signifier would be free

to move. The fact of being born male or female no longer would determine

the subjects position in relation to power.

It should be admitted that whereas feminist theory was a marginal

and suspect intellectual activity in the 1980s , today it is an established

part of the academic circles across the world where Simone de Beauvoir’s

dictum ‘One is not born but rather becomes a woman’ is still relevant. As

Toril Moi rightly remarks “although economic, social, political and

ideological oppression exists, and although such oppression deprives

women of freedom, there is no reason to draw the conclusion that women

can’t work towards change” (178). Feminist theory needs to know how to

find its way back to the ordinary and the everyday and where the political

battles are actually fought. Feminists have to speak from their marginalized

positions and try to make their voices heard in the academic circles.

It has often been argued that women’s writings contain with in itself

a dual tradition. Even self-professed feminist authors sometimes seem to

conform to andocentric norms. The women writers seem to be facing a

dilemma whether they should “sacrifice freedom as an artist to a political

task or to give up self-exploration and accept the truth of the dominant

culture” (Nair, 54). Of course, what is of paramount importance is aiming

for a culture that allows women writers the freedom to articulate their

repressed desires. Consequently, such writers should be able to build up

a female culture as distinct from the accepted male cultures which only

pretend to include within itself female concerns and questions. Beyond

that, a day should come when bride burning and female foeticide should

be things of the past and there should be peaceful coexistence of the males

and females without ever raising the issue of one up man ship.


WORKS CITED

Ashcroft, B., Griffiths, G., Tiffin, H. The Empire Writes Back: Theory and

Practice in Post colonial Lliteratures, Routledge, London. 1989.

Barr, P. The Memsahibs: The Women of Victorian India, Secker & Warburg,

London: 1976.

Beauvoir, Simon de. The Second Sex. Trans. and Ed. H.M. Parshley, New

York: Vintage, 1980.

Eagleton, Mary. Working with Feminist Criticism. Cambridge: Black well,

1996.

Firestone, Shulamith. The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution.

New York: Bantam, 1971.

Gandhi, Leela. Post Colonial Theory: A Critical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford

UP, 1998.

Meany Gerardine.(Un)Like Subjects: Women, Theory, Fiction. London:

Routledge, 1993.

Moi, Toril. Sexual/Textual Politics. London: Routledge, 2002.

Nair, Priya. S. “Female Literary Identity and a dual tradition. A Reading

of the Novels of Margaret Atwood, Angela Carter and Shashi Deshpande”.

Unpublished Ph.D Dissertation. Kannur: Kannur University, 2006.

Ortner, Sherry, “Is Female to Male as Nature is to Culture?” Feminism: The

Public and the Private. Ed. J. Bhandes. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1998.

Salleh, Ariel. Eco feminism as Politics. London: Zed Books, 1997.

Showalter, Elaine: “Women’s Time, Women’s Space”, Tulsa Studies in

Women’s Literature 3, 1984.

_______________ “Towards a Feminist Poetics”. Contemporary Criticism:

An Anthology.Ed. V.S. Sethuraman. Chennai: Macmillan India, 1989.

________________A Literature of Their own: British Women Novelists from

Bronte to Lessing. New Jersey: Princeton UP, 1997.

Spender, Dale. Man Made Language. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul,

1980.


Talpade Mohanty, C. “Under Western eyes: feminist scholarship and

colonial discourse”, reprinted in Colonial Discourse and Post Colonial

Theory: A Reader. Eds Patrick Williams & Laura Christman. New York:

Columbia University Press, 1994.

Wellstonecraft, Mary. A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. Ed. Carol

H. Poston. New York: W.W. Norton, 1975.


EÖòiÉÚ½þ±ÉiÉÉ ºÉä ºÉÆºÉÉ®ú Eäò |ÉÉEÞòÊiÉEò {ÉÊ®ú Éä¶É EòÉä näùJÉxÉä ÉÉ±Éä xÉx½äþ ¡Úò±É ºÉä |É¦ÉÉiÉEòÉ±ÉÒxÉ ÊEò®úhÉ

Eäò ºÉÉlÉ {ÉÆJÉ ¡èò±ÉÉiÉÒ ½Öþ<Ç +ÉªÉÒ ÊiÉiÉ±ÉÒ xÉä {ÉÚUôÉ - “CªÉÉ iÉÖ É ¨ÉÖZÉä WÉ®úÉ ¶É½þnù nÚÄù ? <ºÉEäò ¤Énù±Éä iÉÖ ½þÉ®úÒ

´ÉÆ¶É-{É®Æú{É®úÉ B´ÉÆ {ÉÒføÒ EòÉ +´É¶ªÉ näùJÉ¦ÉÉ±É ¨Éé Eò°ÄüMÉÒ*”

¨ÉÆnù ½þ ÉÉ Eäò ºÉÉ¨ÉxÉä ÊºÉ®ú ZÉÖEòÉiÉä ½ÖþB =ºÉ {ªÉÉ®äú ¡Úò±É xÉä =kÉ®ú ÊnùªÉÉ - “BäºÉÉ ¨Éé xÉä xÉ½þÓ Eò½þÉ

lÉÉ ÊEò ¨Éä®äú ¶É½þnù EòÒ SÉÉä®úÒ ¨ÉiÉ Eò®úxÉÉ* iÉÖ É ºÉä ªÉÉ iÉÖ ½þÉ®äú Ê®ú¶iÉänùÉ®úÉå ºÉä ¨Éé xÉä iÉÊxÉEò ¦ÉÒ +ÊxÉSUôÉ xÉ½þÓ

|ÉEò]õ ¦ÉÒ EòÒ lÉÒ* iÉÖ ½þÉ®äú Ê±ÉB xÉ½þÓ ½þÉä iÉÉä ¨Éé ®úÉäWÉ ÊEòºÉEäò Ê±ÉB ¶É½þnù ºÉä ¦É®ú{ÉÚ®ú ½þÉä VÉÉiÉÉ ?” ÊiÉiÉ±ÉÒ

ºÉ½þ¹ÉÇ ¡Úò±ÉÉå {É®ú =iÉ®ú +ÉªÉÒ* ®ÆúMÉ +Éè®ú ºÉÖMÉÆvÉ Eäò {ÉiÉÉç ¨Éå ¶É½þnù ¦É®úEò®ú ¡Úò±É xÉä ÊiÉiÉ±ÉÒ EòÉ º´ÉÉMÉiÉ-

ºÉiEòÉ®ú JÉÖ±Éä Ênù±É ºÉä ÊEòªÉÉ* BEò xÉä nÚùºÉ®äú EòÉä ¨ÉxÉ ºÉä º´ÉÒEòÉ®úÉ* xÉx½åþ ¡Úò±É ºÉä ¶ÉÖÊGòªÉÉ +nùÉ Eò®úEäò

|ÉiªÉÖ{ÉEòÉ®ú Eäò °ü{É ¨Éå =ºÉEäò {É®úÉMÉ-EòhÉÉå EòÉä ºÉ¤É Eò½þÓ º´ÉÒEòÉ®ú Eò®ú +{ÉxÉä VÉÒ´ÉxÉ-±ÉIªÉ EòÒ {ÉÚÌiÉ Eò®úxÉä

EòÒ =iºÉÖEòiÉÉ ºÉä ÊiÉiÉ±ÉÒ +{ÉxÉä {ÉÆJÉ ¡èò±ÉÉiÉä ½ÖþB nÚùºÉ®äú ¡Úò±É EòÉä ±ÉIªÉ ¤ÉxÉÉEò®ú =b÷ MÉªÉÒ*

¡Úò±É +Éè®ú ÊiÉiÉ±ÉÒ Eäò ªÉÖMÉ-ªÉÖMÉÉå ºÉä ½þÉäxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÉ ªÉ½þ ºÉÆ¤ÉvÉ .......vÉ®úiÉÒ EòÒ ºÉÚI¨É VÉÒ´ÉxÉ-¸ÉÞÆJÉ±ÉÉ

EòÒ EòÊb÷ªÉÉå EòÉä ]Úõ]äõ Ê¤ÉxÉÉ ºÉÖ®úÊIÉiÉ ®úJÉiÉä ½ÖþB +É{ÉºÉÒ ºÉÆ¤ÉxvÉ B´ÉÆ Ê¨ÉjÉiÉÉ EòÉ =kÉ¨É +Éè®ú ºÉ®ú±É =nùÉ½þ®úhÉ

½èþ*

“- ¨ÉÖZÉä VÉÉä EÖòUô SÉÉÊ½þB ´É½þ iÉÚ näùxÉÉ +Éè®ú iÉÖ ½þÉ®äú Ê±ÉB ¨Éé ¦ÉÒ*”

´ÉxÉº{ÉÊiÉ +Éè®ú VÉÆiÉÖ+Éå Eäò ¤ÉÒSÉ EòÒ ªÉ½þ ´ÉèÊ´ÉvªÉ¨ÉªÉ Ê¨ÉjÉiÉÉ vÉ®úiÉÒ ¨Éå VÉÒ´ÉxÉ EòÒ

ÊxÉ®ÆúiÉ®úiÉÉ EòÉä PÉÊxÉ¹]õ B´ÉÆ ºÉÖoùfø ¤ÉxÉÉxÉä Eäò Ê±ÉB |ÉEÞòÊiÉ EòÉ VÉÉnÚù ½èþ ªÉ½þ* +Éè®ú BEò ºÉÚI¨É =nùÉ½þ®úhÉ -

<ºÉ Eò½þÉxÉÒ Eäò xÉÉªÉEò-xÉÉÊªÉEòÉ BEò |ÉEòÉ®ú EòÉ ¡ò¡ÚÄònù +Éè®ú {ÉkÉä JÉÉxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÒ SÉÓ]õÒ ½èþ* {ÉkÉä JÉÉxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÒ

SÉÓ]õÒ VÉÒ´ÉxÉ ¦É®ú {ÉkÉä EòÉ]õ-b÷É±ÉiÉÒ ®ú½þiÉÒ* ±ÉäÊEòxÉ +¡òºÉÉäºÉ EòÒ ¤ÉÉiÉ ªÉ½þ ½èþ ÊEò Eò]äõ ½ÖþB {ÉkÉä EòÒ fäø®ú

¨ÉÉxÉ´É <iÉxÉÉ PÉ¨ÉÆb÷ CªÉÉå Eò®úiÉÉ ?

ÉÒ.EÖò¨ÉÉ®úxÉË½þnùÒ Ê´É¦ÉÉMÉ


EòÉä {ÉSÉÉxÉä ¨ÉÉjÉ BxÉWÉÉ<¨É ¤ÉäSÉÉ®úÒ SÉÓ]õÒ Eäò ¶É®úÒ®ú ºÉä ÊxÉEò±ÉiÉÒ xÉ½þÓ* JÉ¤É®ú {ÉÉEò®ú BEò |ÉEòÉ®ú EòÉ ¡ò¡ÚÄònù

SÉÓ]õÒ Eäò {ÉÉºÉ {É½ÖÄþSÉiÉä - “iÉÖ ½þÉ®äú {ÉkÉä Eäò fäø®ú EòÉä {ÉSÉÉxÉä Eäò Ê±ÉB ½þ É iÉèªÉÉ®ú ½èþ* ¤Énù±Éä ¨Éå ¤ÉäPÉ®ú ½þÉäxÉä ÉÉ±Éä

½þ Éå BEò UôÉä]õÒ ZÉÉå{Éb÷Ò ¤ÉxÉÉEò®ú näùxÉÉ*”

¡ò¡ÚÄònù EòÒ ªÉ½þ ¶ÉiÉÇ SÉÓ]õÒ xÉä JÉÖ¶É½þÉ±É ºÉä º´ÉÒEòÉ®ú EòÒ* iÉÖ®ÆúiÉ +iªÉÊvÉEò ºÉÖ®úIÉÉ B´ÉÆ ´ÉÉiÉÉxÉÖEÚò±É

EòÒ ºÉÖÊ´ÉvÉÉ ´ÉÉ±Éä BEò +SUôÉ ´ÉÉi¨ÉÒEò ¡ò¡ÚÄònù Eäò Ê±ÉB iÉèªÉÉ®ú ÊEòªÉÉ MÉªÉÉ ½èþ* =ºÉä ¨ÉÉ®úxÉä Eäò Ê±ÉB +ÉB

ºÉÊ¦ÉªÉÉå EòÉä SÉÓ]õÒ xÉä ¦ÉMÉÉªÉÉ* ¡ò¡ÚÄònù EòÒ iÉÆnÖù¯ûºiÉÒ EòÉ +iÉÒ´É vªÉÉxÉ ¦ÉÒ ®úJÉÉ* <ºÉEäò ¤Énù±Éä ¡ò¡ÚÄònù xÉä

SÉÓ]õÒ Eäò uùÉ®úÉ EòÉ]õ ÊnùB MÉB {ÉkÉä Eäò fäø®ú EòÉä +{ÉxÉÒ Eò®úÉ¨ÉiÉ ºÉä VÉ±nùÒ ½þÒ {ÉSÉÉxÉä ªÉÉäMªÉ ¤ÉxÉÉ ÊnùªÉÉ*

ªÉÉå +É{ÉºÉÒ Ê¨ÉjÉiÉÉ +Éè®ú {ÉÉ®úº{ÉÊ®úEò ºÉ½þªÉÉäMÉ ºÉä SÉÓ]õÒ +Éè®ú ¡ò¡ÚÄònù EòÉ VÉÒ´ÉxÉ JÉÖ¶ÉÒ ºÉä EòÉ]õiÉä

®ú½äþ* +ÉVÉ ªÉÉ Eò±É ºÉä xÉ½þÓ ¤ÉÎ±Eò ºÉèEòb÷Éå ´É¹ÉÉç ºÉä ªÉ½þ xÉÉiÉÉ Ê¤ÉxÉÉ ÊEòºÉÒ ´ªÉ´ÉvÉÉxÉ ºÉä {ªÉÉ®ú B´ÉÆ Ê¨ÉjÉiÉÉ

ºÉä VÉÉ®úÒ ®úJÉÉ*

<ºÉ |ÉEòÉ®ú {ÉÒiÉä-Ê{É±ÉÉiÉä ¡Úò±É +Éè®ú ÊiÉiÉ±ÉÒ SÉÓ]õÒ +Éè®ú ¡ò¡ÚÄònù ºÉä +ÉMÉä ¤ÉføxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÒ <ºÉ VÉÒ´ÉxÉ-

¶ÉÞÆJÉ±ÉÉ ¨Éå BEòÉªÉEò nù®úÉ®ú {ÉènùÉ Eò®úiÉä ½ÖþB BEò GÚò®ú ´ÉMÉÇ <ºÉ vÉ®úiÉÒ ¨Éå +{ÉxÉÉ iÉÉhb÷ É-xÉÞiªÉ Eò®úxÉä ±ÉMÉÉ

..... +Éè®ú EòÉä<Ç xÉ½þÓ ´É½þ ¨ÉxÉÖ¹ªÉ ½þÒ ½èþ VÉÉä <Ç ÉÉxÉnùÉ®ú, ºÉÆºEòÉ®ú ºÉä ºÉÆ{ÉzÉ +Éè®ú ªÉÖMÉ EòÉ =kÉ¨É ={ÉVÉ Eäò

°ü{É ¨Éå PÉ¨Éhb÷ Eò®úxÉä ÉÉ±Éä ½éþ* |ÉEÞòÊiÉ EòÒ º´ÉºlÉ +Îº¨ÉiÉÉ EòÒ ¤ÉÖÊxÉªÉÉnù ½þÉäxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÒ ±ÉäxÉ-näùxÉ ´ªÉ´ÉºlÉÉ Eäò

Ê´É{É®úÒiÉ +ÉVÉ +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ¨ÉÉxÉ´É ºÉ¤É EÖòUô SÉÚºÉiÉä ½ÖþB =ºÉEäò ¤Énù±Éä Ê¤ÉxÉÉ EÖòUô ÊnùB, PÉ¨Éhb÷ ºÉä SÉ±ÉxÉä ÉÉ±Éä

VÉÉxÉ´É®ú ¤ÉxÉ MÉB* +{ÉxÉÒ ºÉÖJÉ-ºÉÖÊ´ÉvÉÉ Eäò Ê±ÉB |ÉÉEÞòÊiÉEò ºÉÆ{ÉÊkÉ EòÉä, ÊVÉiÉxÉÉ ½þÉä ºÉEäò, ±ÉÚ]õxÉä Eäò Ê±ÉB

xÉ½þÓ Ê½þSÉEòxÉä ÉÉ±Éä <ºÉ vÉÚiÉÇ {ÉÖjÉ Eäò +iªÉÉSÉÉ®ú B´ÉÆ PÉ¨Éhb÷ ºÉä +ÉVÉ vÉ®úiÉÒ EòÉ¡òÒ EÆòMÉÉ±É ¤ÉxÉ MÉªÉÒ ½èþ*

ºÉ¨ÉZÉiÉÒ xÉ½þÓ iÉÉä ªÉ½þ ±ÉäJÉÉ-VÉÉäJÉÉ WÉ®úÉ näùÊJÉB - ={É±É¤vÉ ´Éè¦É´É B´ÉÆ =ºÉEòÒ ±ÉÚ]õ-¨ÉÉ®ú Eäò Ê½þºÉÉ¤É Eäò ¤ÉÉ®äú

¨Éå World Wild Life Fund xÉä ºÉxÉÂ 2002 ¨Éå BEò Ê´ÉºiÉÞiÉ ¤ªÉÉä®úÉ |ÉºiÉÖiÉ ÊEòªÉÉ lÉÉ* =ºÉEäò +xÉÖºÉÉ®ú

=iÉxÉÉ ¶ÉÖ¦É xÉ ½þÉäxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÉ EÖòUô ¤ªÉÉä®úÉ -

+ÉVÉ vÉ®úiÉÒ ºÉÆ{ÉÊkÉ EòÉ ªÉ½þ ±ÉÚ]õ-¨ÉÉ®ú VÉÉ®úÒ ®úJÉä iÉÉä 2050 ½þÉäiÉä ´ÉHò ¦ÉÚ-ºÉÆ{ÉÊkÉ EòÉ +ÊvÉEòÉÆ¶É

Ê½þººÉÉ MÉÉªÉ¤É ½þÉä VÉÉªÉäMÉÉ* =ºÉ ºÉ¨ÉªÉ iÉEò nÖùÊxÉªÉÉ EòÒ ½þWÉÉ®úÉå-Eò®úÉäb÷Éå iÉEò +ÉxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÒ +É¤ÉÉnùÒ EòÉä ¤ÉºÉÉxÉä

Eäò Ê±ÉB <ºÉ vÉ®úiÉÒ Eäò ºÉ¨ÉÉxÉ Ê´É¶ÉÉ±É B´ÉÆ Ê´ÉºiÉÞiÉ +Éè®ú BEò vÉ®úiÉÒ JÉÉäVÉEò®ú ÊxÉEòÉ±ÉxÉÒ {Ébä÷MÉÒ*


+ÉVÉ ½þÒ vÉ®úiÉÒ Eäò 200 Eò®úÉäb÷ ½äþC]õ®ú =´ÉÇ®ú B´ÉÆ ={ÉªÉÉäMÉÒ |Énäù¶É Ê¨É]Âõ]õÒ Eäò ¤É½þ VÉÉxÉä ºÉä >ðºÉ®ú-

¤ÉÆVÉ®ú ¤ÉxÉ MÉªÉÉ ½èþ* vÉ®úiÉÒ EòÒ ºÉiÉ½þ {É®ú ½þÉäxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÒ ={ÉVÉÉ>ð Ê¨É]Âõ]õÒ EòÉä ºÉÖ®úÊIÉiÉ ®úJÉiÉä ½ÖþB ½þ®äú SÉÉnù®ú ºÉä

+ÉäføEò®ú ®ú½þxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÒ ´ÉxÉº{ÉÊiÉªÉÉå EòÉ SÉÉ±ÉÒºÉ |ÉÊiÉ¶ÉiÉ +¤É xÉ¹]õ-§É¹]õ ½þÉä MÉªÉÉ ½èþ* ºÉ¤É |ÉEòÉ®ú EòÒ ºÉÖ®úIÉÉ-

®úÒÊiÉ, ÊxÉªÉ¨É +Éè®ú ÊxÉªÉÆjÉhÉ EòÉä ½þ ÉÉ ¨Éå =b÷ÉiÉä ½ÖþB ¶Éä¹É ®ú½þxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÒ ´ÉxÉ ¦ÉÚÊ¨É ¦ÉÒ +ÉVÉ ÊnùxÉ ´É ÊnùxÉ xÉ¹]õ

½þÉä ®ú½þÒ ½èþ*

<ºÉ |ÉEòÉ®ú ´ªÉÉ{ÉEò ´ÉxÉ-=x¨ÉÚ±ÉxÉ +Éè®ú {ÉÊ®úÎºlÉÊiÉ-Ê´Év´ÉÆºÉ ºÉä ¨ÉÉjÉ MÉiÉ BEò ºÉnùÒ ¨Éå 200 ºÉä

WªÉÉnùÉ {ÉIÉÒ-ºÉ¨ÉÚ½þ B´ÉÆ ºiÉxÉÒ ´ÉMÉÇ <ºÉ vÉ®úiÉÒ ºÉä +|ÉiªÉIÉ ½þÉä MÉB, ¤ÉSÉÉxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÉå ¨Éå 200 ºÉä WªÉÉnùÉ ´ÉMÉÇ +¤É

´ÉÆ¶ÉxÉÉ¶É EòÒ ÎºlÉÊiÉ {É®ú ½éþ* vÉ®úiÉÒ EòÉä ºÉnùÉ Eäò Ê±ÉB xÉ¹]õ ½þÉä MÉB {Éäb÷-{ÉÉèvÉÉå EòÒ ºÉÆJªÉÉ ½þWÉÉ®úÉå ½éþ*

ºÉÆºÉÉ®ú EòÒ {ªÉÉºÉ ¤ÉÖZÉÉxÉä Eäò Ê±ÉB VÉÒ´ÉxÉ-VÉ±É ¦É®úEò®ú ¤É½þxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÒ xÉÊnùªÉÉå ¨Éå +ÊvÉEòÉÆ¶É +ÉVÉ

<ÊiÉ½þÉºÉ B´ÉÆ Ê´É¦ÉÚÊiÉ EòÉ +Æ¶É ¤ÉxÉ MÉB ½éþ* ºÉ¨ÉÖÆnù®ú EòÒ ÎºlÉÊiÉ ¦ÉÒ <ºÉºÉä Ê¦ÉzÉ xÉ½þÓ ½èþ* +ÊxÉªÉÆÊjÉiÉ EÚòbä÷-

EòSÉ®äú EòÒ VÉ¨ÉÉiÉ Eäò EòÉ®úhÉ ºÉ¨ÉÖÆnù®ú ¦ÉÒ +ÉVÉ BEò ¤Éb÷Ò EÚòb÷É-vÉÉxÉÒ ¤ÉxÉ MÉB ½éþ* +iÉ& ªÉÖMÉÉå ºÉä =ºÉEäò

ÊEòxÉÉ®äú EòÒ ´ÉxÉº{ÉÊiÉ B´ÉÆ VÉÆiÉÖ-VÉÉxÉ´É®ú ¨Éå ºÉä +ÊvÉEòÉÆ¶É +ÉVÉ MÉÉªÉ¤É ½þÉä MÉB ½éþ* +±ÉÉ´ÉÉ <ºÉEäò ¤ÉføiÉÒ

½Öþ<Ç MÉ¨ÉÔ Eäò |É¦ÉÉ´É ºÉä ºÉ¨ÉÖpù EòÉ iÉÉ{É B´ÉÆ {ÉÉxÉÒ EòÒ ºÉiÉ½þ BEò ºÉ¨ÉÉxÉ >ÄðSÉÒ =`öö ®ú½þÒ ½èþ* wÉÖ ÉÉå Éå ½þÉäxÉä ÉÉ±Éä

¤É¡Çò +ÊvÉEòÉÊvÉEò Ê{ÉPÉ±ÉiÉÉ ®ú½þiÉÉ ½èþ* ¨ÉUôÊ±ÉªÉÉå EòÒ ºÉÆJªÉÉ ¨Éå MÉiÉ SÉÉ®ú-{ÉÉÄSÉ ºÉnùÒ ¨Éå ½Öþ<Ç ÊMÉ®úÉ´É]õ Eò®úÒ¤É

{ÉSSÉÉºÉ |ÉÊiÉ¶ÉiÉ ½èþ* <ºÉ |ÉEòÉ®ú ºÉ¨ÉÉxÉ °ü{É ºÉä ºÉ¨ÉÖpù B´ÉÆ vÉ®úiÉÒ ¤ÉÆVÉ®ú ¤ÉxÉiÉä ®ú½þiÉä ½éþ*

<ºÉ +nÂù¦ÉÖiÉ ±ÉäJÉÉ-VÉÉäJÉÉ ºÉä {ÉiÉÉ iÉÉä ªÉ½þ SÉ±ÉiÉÉ ½èþ ÊEò 2050 ¨Éå ¨ÉÉxÉ´É-®úÉÊ¶É EòÉä VÉÒxÉä Eäò Ê±ÉB

+Éè®ú BEò vÉ®úiÉÒ EòÒ +É´É¶ªÉEòiÉÉ {Ébä÷MÉÒ* +ÉMÉä ªÉ½þ ¦ÉÒ ºÉÚÊSÉiÉ Eò®úxÉÉ SÉÉ½þiÉÉ ½ÚÄþ ÊEò ºÉxÉÂ 2050 BEò BäºÉÉ

nÚù®únù¶ÉÔ WÉ¨ÉÉxÉÉ xÉ½þÓ VÉÉä BäºÉÉ ÉÉ±ÉÚ É ½þÉä VÉÉiÉÉ ½èþ ÊEò ºÉÚªÉÇ Ê{ÉPÉ±ÉEò®ú ÊMÉ®ú VÉÉªÉ, vÉ®úiÉÒ ¤ÉÉfø Éå bÚ÷¤É VÉÉªÉ

+Éè®ú ºÉÆºÉÉ®ú ¨Éå +Éè®ú BEò Ê´Éº¡òÉä]õ ½þÉä VÉÉªÉ* ¤ÉÎ±Eò ªÉ½þ ½þ É ¨Éå ºÉä Eò<ÇªÉÉå EòÉä º´ÉºlÉ B´ÉÆ ¾þ¹]õõ-{ÉÖ¹]õ ¶É®úÒ®ú

Eäò ºÉÉlÉ VÉÒxÉä, ½þ ÉÉ®úÒ +MÉ±ÉÒ {ÉÒføÒ EòÉä ºÉEÖò¶É±É ®ú½þEò®ú VÉÒxÉä EòÉ ÊºÉ¡Çò SÉÉ±ÉÒºÉ ´É¹ÉÇ Eäò ¤ÉÉnù Eäò WÉ¨ÉÉxÉä

EòÒ ¤ÉÉiÉ ½èþ* ±ÉäÊEòxÉ ªÉ½þ xÉÉVÉÖEò ½èþÊºÉªÉiÉ +{ÉxÉä nù½þ±ÉäVÉ {É®ú +É {É½ÖÄþSÉxÉä Eäò ¤ÉÉ´ÉVÉÚnù ¨ÉÉxÉ´É +¤É ¦ÉÒ xÉÓnù

ºÉä VÉÉMÉÉ xÉ½þÓ* ¤ÉäSÉÉ®úÉ ¨ÉÉxÉ´É ªÉ½þ VÉÉxÉiÉÉ xÉ½þÓ ÊEò º´ÉÉlÉÇ B´ÉÆ ºÉÖJÉ ±ÉÉä±ÉÖ{É VÉÒ´ÉxÉ Eäò ¨ÉÚiÉÇ EòÒ ªÉ½þ ±Éb÷É<Ç

+{ÉxÉÒ ÊxÉVÉÒ {É®úUôÉ<Ç ºÉä ½þÒ ½èþ - ªÉ½þ É½þ VÉÉxÉiÉÉ xÉ½þÓ* +¤É ¦ÉÒ Éä +ÉVÉ BEò-BEò Eò®úEäò nÖùÊxÉªÉÉ EòÉä ½þb÷{ÉxÉä

¨Éå ´ªÉºiÉ ½éþ*


<ºÉ |ÉEòÉ®ú Eäò +iªÉÉSÉÉ®ú Eäò ®úlÉ Eäò {ÉÊ½þB Eäò xÉÒSÉä nù¤ÉEò®ú ]Úõ]õxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÒ VÉÒ´ÉxÉ-EòÊb÷ªÉÉÄ +Éè®ú

+|ÉiªÉIÉ ½þÉäxÉä ÉÉ±Éä {Éäb÷-{ÉÉèvÉä B´ÉÆ VÉÆiÉÖ-VÉÉxÉ´É®ú, MÉÉªÉ¤É ½þÉäxÉä ÉÉ±Éä ´ÉxÉ, xÉnùÒ +Éè®ú JÉäiÉ .... EÖòUô ¦ÉÒ =ºÉ Eäò

Ê±ÉB ¨ÉÚ±ªÉ´ÉÉxÉ xÉ½þÓ* ªÉÖMÉÉå ºÉä ¨É½þºÉÚºÉxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÒ MÉ®ú ÉÒ Eäò EòÉ®úhÉ VÉÒ´ÉxÉ EòÉ º{ÉÆnùxÉ ºÉÚJÉEò®ú xÉ¹]õ ½ÖþB ¤Ébä÷-

¤Ébä÷ xÉMÉ®ú, ´ÉxÉ-ºÉÆ{ÉÊkÉ Eäò =x¨ÉÚ±ÉxÉ ºÉä vÉ®úiÉÒ ºÉä {ÉÉåUôÒ MÉªÉÒ xÉÊnùªÉÉÄ, ¨ÉÉèiÉ Eäò <ÆiÉWÉÉ®ú ¨Éå ºÉ¨ÉÖpù ºÉä >ð{É®ú

JÉbä÷ uùÒ{É EÖòUô ¦ÉÒ =ºÉEòÒ ËSÉiÉÉ EòÉ Ê´É¹ÉªÉ xÉ½þÓ* =ºÉEäò Ê±ÉB ªÉ½þ ºÉ¤É Eò½þÓ nÚù®ú PÉ]õxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÒ PÉ]õxÉÉBÄ

½éþ* +{ÉxÉä SÉÉ®úÉå +Éä®ú EòÒ ºÉÖJÉ-ºÉÖÊ´ÉvÉÉ+Éå +Éè®ú ºÉÆ{ÉÊkÉ Eäò ¤ÉÉ½þ®ú EòÉä<Ç ¦ÉÒ ºÉÉ¨ÉÉÊVÉEò EòÉªÉÇ-Eò±ÉÉ{É +ÉVÉ

=ºÉEäò Ê±ÉB xÉ½þÓ Eäò ¤É®úÉ¤É®ú ½éþ* ¨Éé, ¨Éä®úÉ {ÉÊ®ú ÉÉ®ú, ¨Éä®úÉ PÉ®ú - <ºÉEòÉä UôÉäb÷Eò®ú PÉ®ú Eäò +½þÉiÉä Eäò ¤ÉÉ½þ®ú

EòÒ nÖùÊxÉªÉÉ SÉEòxÉÉSÉÚ®ú ½þÉäxÉä {É®ú ¦ÉÒ =ºÉä EòÉä<Ç ËSÉiÉÉ xÉ½þÓ*

Eò½þxÉä EòÉ ¨ÉiÉ±É¤É vÉ®úiÉÒ EòÒ º´ÉºlÉ +Îº¨ÉiÉÉ Eäò Ê±ÉB JÉiÉ®úxÉÉEò ½þÉäxÉä ÉÉ±Éä ºÉ¦ÉÒ ÊGòªÉÉ Eò±ÉÉ{É

=ºÉÒ ¨ÉxÉÖ¹ªÉ Eäò EòÉ®úhÉ PÉÊ]õiÉ ½þÉäiÉä ½éþ VÉÉä ºÉÆºÉÉ®ú Eäò ºÉ¤ÉºÉä =kÉ¨É ¦ÉÒ ½èþ* =ºÉÒ |ÉEòÉ®ú ¨ÉÉxÉ´É EòÒ |ÉMÉÊiÉ

Eäò Ê±ÉB ÊxÉnù¶ÉÇxÉ ½þÉäxÉä ÉÉ±Éä ªÉÉiÉÉªÉÉiÉ B´ÉÆ +É´ÉÉºÉ EòÒ ºÉÖÊ´ÉvÉÉBÄ ¦ÉÒ +ÉVÉ vÉ®úiÉÒ EòÉä ¤ÉÆVÉ®ú ¤ÉxÉÉiÉÒ ½èþ* ªÉ½þ

+VÉÒ¤É ¤ÉÉiÉ ½èþ ÊEò ´É½þÒ ¨ÉxÉÖ¹ªÉ <xÉ ºÉ¤ÉEäò Ê±ÉB ÊVÉ¨¨ÉänùÉ®ú ½èþ*

+ÉMÉä PÉ®ú ......... ´É½þ ºÉÆºEÞòÊiÉ, ºÉÖ®úIÉÉ, ºÉÉ¨ÉÉÊVÉEò xÉÒÊiÉ EòÉ nÚùºÉ®úÉ {ÉªÉÉÇªÉ ½èþ* ËEòiÉÖ +ÉVÉ

´Éä Ê´É±ÉÉÊºÉiÉÉ B´ÉÆ ±ÉÚ]õ ÉÉ®ú EòÉ ¨ÉÉ{Énùhb÷ ¤ÉxÉ MÉªÉä ½éþ* WÉ°ü®úÒ Eäò Ê±ÉB xÉ½þÓ; Ê´É±ÉÉÊºÉiÉÉ B´ÉÆ ¡èò¶ÉxÉ EòÒ

=¨¨ÉÒnù ½þÒ PÉ®ú Eäò ÊxÉ¨ÉÉÇhÉ EòÉä |É¦ÉÉÊ´ÉiÉ Eò®úiÉÉ ½èþ* PÉ®ú ¤ÉxÉÉiÉä ºÉ¨ÉªÉ |ÉÉSÉÒxÉ EòÉ±É Eäò ¨ÉxÉÖ¹ªÉ xÉä vÉ®úiÉÒ

Eäò ´Éè¦É´É EòÉ ±ÉÚ]õ ÉÉ®ú Eò¨É ºÉä Eò¨É Eò®úxÉä Eäò Ê±ÉB vªÉÉxÉ ÊnùªÉÉ lÉÉ* PÉ®ú Eäò Ê±ÉB SÉÉä®úÒ EòxÉ®äú ÉÉ±ÉÒ lÉÉäb÷Ò

ºÉÒ Ê¨É]Âõ]õÒ Eäò xÉÉ¨É {É®ú =ºÉxÉä vÉ®úiÉÒ ¨ÉÉÄ ºÉä ¨ÉÉ¡òÒ ¨ÉÉÄMÉÒ lÉÒ ; PÉ®ú ¤ÉxÉÉxÉä Eäò Ê±ÉB EòÉ]õ ÊnùªÉä VÉÉxÉä ÉÉ±Éä

{Éäb÷ +Éè®ú =ºÉEäò ÊxÉ´ÉÉºÉÒ VÉÆiÉÖ ´ÉMÉÇ ºÉä =ºÉxÉä IÉ¨ÉÉ ¨ÉÉÄMÉÒ lÉÒ* =ºÉÒ |ÉEòÉ®ú PÉ®ú Eäò Ê±ÉB UôÒxÉ ±ÉÒ MÉªÉÒ

½þ ÉÉ, {ÉÉxÉÒ +Éè®ú +ÉMÉ ºÉä ¨ÉÉ¡òÒ ¨ÉÉÄMÉÒ lÉÒ* ºÉ¦ÉÒ VÉÆiÉÖ-VÉÉxÉ´É®ú Eäò Ê±ÉB ºÉ¨ÉÉxÉ +ÊvÉEòÉ®ú ½þÉäxÉä ÉÉ±Éä ¦ÉÚ-´Éè¦É´É

+{ÉxÉÒ ÊxÉVÉÒ ºÉÖJÉ-ºÉÖÊ´ÉvÉÉ Eäò Ê±ÉB SÉÉä®úÒ Eò®úiÉä ºÉ¨ÉªÉ ´É½þ Eò¨É ºÉä Eò¨É ±ÉäxÉÉ - ªÉ½þÒ =ºÉEòÒ ¶ÉiÉÇ lÉÒ*

<ºÉEòÒ ´ÉVÉ½þ {ÉÖ®úÉxÉä PÉ®ú EòÒ ´É½þ ºÉ®ú±ÉiÉÉ +Éè®ú ºÉÉnùMÉÒ =ºÉEòÉ ÊxÉ¶ÉÉxÉ lÉÉ* ±ÉäÊEòxÉ +ÉVÉ ............

®úÉVÉºlÉÉxÉ Eäò +vÉ ¦ÉÚJÉä ¤ÉäSÉÉ®äú MÉÉÄ É´ÉÉ±ÉÉå EòÉä +{ÉxÉÒ Ê¨É]Âõ]õÒ B´ÉÆ ´ÉiÉxÉ ºÉä ¦ÉMÉÉEò®ú ´É½þÉÄ ºÉä JÉÉänù ±Éä

VÉÉxÉä ÉÉ±Éä ºÉÆMÉ¨É®ú É®ú ºÉä ¤ÉxÉä ¤Ébä÷-¤Ébä÷ ¶ÉÉxÉnùÉ®ú ¦É´ÉxÉ B´ÉÆ +]Âõ]õÉÊ±ÉEòÉBÄ*


=ºÉÒ +]Âõ]õÉÊ±ÉEòÉ Eäò SÉÉ®úÉå +Éä®ú ¤Ébä÷-¤Ébä÷ nùÒ´ÉÉ®ú ÊVÉºÉºÉä ½þ ÉÉ ¦ÉÒ +ÉiÉÒ xÉ½þÓ* +½þÉiÉä Eäò nùÒ´ÉÉ®ú

+Éè®ú +]Âõ]õÉÊ±ÉEòÉ Eäò ¤ÉÒSÉ EòÒ UôÉä]õÒ ºÉÒ Ê¨É]Âõ]õÒ ¦ÉÒ +ÉVÉ EòÉxÉGòÒ]õ Eò®úEäò {ÉCEòÉ, ºÉÉ¡ò-ºÉÖvÉ®úÉ +Éè®ú

ÊSÉEòxÉÉ ¤ÉxÉÉ ÊnùªÉÉ ½èþ* BEò ÊiÉxÉEòÉ ¦ÉÒ ´É½þÉÄ =MÉxÉÉ xÉ½þÓ, BEò ¤ÉÚÄnù {ÉÉxÉÒ ¦ÉÒ vÉ®úiÉÒ EòÒ +Ænù°üxÉÒ {ÉiÉÉç

¨Éå VÉÉxÉÉ xÉ½þÓ .......* +iÉ& {ÉÖ®úÉxÉä WÉ¨ÉÉxÉä näù¶É ¨Éå +MÉ®ú BEò +]Âõ]õÉÊ±ÉEòÉ EòÉªÉ¨É ½þÉäiÉÒ iÉÉä +ÉVÉ näù¶É

¦É®ú <¨ÉÉ®úiÉå B´ÉÆ +]Âõ]õÉÊ±ÉEòÉBÄ ½éþ - UôÉä]õÒ +Éè®ú ¤Éb÷Ò ±ÉÉJÉÉå <¨ÉÉ®úiÉ* ½þ®ú BEò ÉEòÉxÉ Eäò ºÉÉlÉ ÉÉ±Éä +½þÉiÉä,

nùÒ´ÉÉ®ú B´ÉÆ EòÉxÉGòÒ]õ ÊEòªÉÉ MÉªÉÉ +ÉÄMÉxÉ ½þÉäxÉÉ ½èþ - ªÉ½þÒ +ÉVÉ BäºÉÉ BEò +Ê±ÉÊJÉiÉ ÊxÉªÉ¨É ¤ÉxÉ MÉªÉÉ ½èþ*

ªÉÉå ¤ÉäSÉÉ®úÒ vÉ®úiÉÒ ¨ÉÉÄ +{ÉxÉÒ UôÉiÉÒ {É®ú ½þWÉÉ®úÉå ¨ÉEòÉxÉÉå EòÉ ´ÉVÉxÉ ±ÉäEò®ú, =ºÉEòÒ ¤ÉÉäZÉ ´É½þxÉ

Eò®úEäò =ºÉEòÉ ¦ÉÉ®ú B´ÉÆ +ÉPÉÉiÉ ºÉ½þ xÉ ºÉEòxÉä Eäò ½äþiÉÖ +Éè®ú +ÊvÉEò nÖù¤ÉÇ±É B´ÉÆ lÉEòÒ ¤ÉxÉ MÉªÉÒ ½èþ* ±ÉäÊEòxÉ

Ê´É±ÉÉÊºÉiÉÉ ºÉä {ÉÉMÉ±É ½þÉäEò®ú =ºÉEäò {ÉÒUäô VÉÉiÉä ´ÉHò vÉ®úiÉÒ Eäò ¤ÉÉ®äú ¨Éå ºÉÉäSÉxÉä Eäò Ê±ÉB ¡Öò®úºÉiÉ +ÉVÉ ÊEòºÉÒ

EòÉä xÉ½þÓ*

½þ®ú BEò +Énù¨ÉÒ +ÉVÉ ½þÉäb÷ Eò®úiÉä ½ÖþB PÉ®ú ¤ÉxÉ´ÉÉiÉä ½éþ* {Éb÷ÉäºÉÒ EòÉ PÉ®ú +MÉ®ú 2000 ¡Úò]õ EòÉ

½èþ iÉÉä +{ÉxÉÉ 3000 ºÉä Eò¨É xÉ ½þÉäxÉÉ* =ºÉä ºÉÉäxÉä EòÉ Eò¨É®úÉ SÉÉ®ú ½éþ iÉÉä +{ÉxÉä Ê±ÉB {ÉÉÄSÉ SÉÉÊ½þB* Eò¨ÉÉ<Ç

EòÉ +ÉÊJÉ®úÒ <EòzÉÉ ¦ÉÒ PÉ®ú EòÉä |ÉÉèfø B´ÉÆ ¶ÉÉxÉnùÉ®ú ¤ÉxÉÉxÉä ¨Éå ´Éä iÉèªÉÉ®ú ½éþ*

+ÉVÉ {ÉèºÉä xÉ½þÓ ½þÉäxÉä ÉÉ±Éä MÉ®úÒ¤ÉÉå Eäò Ê±ÉB ¦ÉÒ =vÉÉ®ú näùxÉä EòÉä +ÉVÉEò±É Eäò ¤ÉéEò iÉèªÉÉ®ú ½þÉäEò®ú +ÉMÉä

+ÉiÉÒ ½èþ - ±ÉÉJÉÉå °ü{ÉªÉÉå EòÉ =vÉÉ®ú* <ºÉÊ±ÉB UôÉå{Éb÷Ò ºÉä +]Âõ]õÉÊ±ÉEòÉ iÉEò VÉÉxÉä Eäò Ê±ÉB EÖòUô ½þºiÉÉIÉ®úÉå

B´ÉÆ SÉäEòÉå EòÒ nÚù®úÒ ¨ÉÉjÉ ½èþ*

ªÉÉå VÉÆMÉ±É, {É½þÉb÷, JÉäiÉ B´ÉÆ xÉnùÒ EòÉä ¨ÉÉ®úEò®ú MÉÉb÷xÉä Eäò ={É®úÉÆiÉ vÉ®úiÉÒ ¦É®ú +]Âõ]õÉÊ±ÉEòÉBÄ JÉb÷Ò

½þÉä VÉÉiÉÒ ½èþ - Ê¦ÉzÉ-Ê¦ÉzÉ +ÉEòÉ®ú, °ü{É-®ÆúMÉ Eäò +xÉÊMÉxÉiÉ ¨ÉEòÉxÉ*

=ºÉ +]Âõ]õÉÊ±ÉEòÉ Eäò ºÉÉ¨ÉxÉä +{ÉxÉÒ ºÉÆiÉÉxÉ EòÉ ½þÉlÉ {ÉEòb÷Eò®ú MÉ´ÉÇ Eäò ºÉÉlÉ ¨ÉÉÄ-¤ÉÉ{É Eò½þiÉä ½éþ

- “¤Éä]äõ +ÉVÉ +É{É ±ÉÉäMÉÉå EòÒ ¶ÉÉxÉnùÉ®ú ËWÉnùMÉÒ Eäò Ê±ÉB ½þ ÉxÉä SÉÉä®úÒ Eò®úEäò, Ê®ú·ÉiÉ ±ÉäiÉä, =vÉÉ®ú ±ÉäEäò ªÉ½þ

¤ÉxÉ´ÉÉªÉÉ ½èþ*”

¤Éä]äõ Eäò |ÉÊiÉ {ªÉÉ®ú Eò®úEäò ºÉ¤É Eò½þÓ EòÉxÉGòÒ]õ-ºÉÆMÉ¨É®ú É®ú Ê¤ÉUôÉEò®ú VÉÒ´ÉxÉ EòÒ SÉäiÉxÉiÉÉ EòÉ

ºÉiªÉxÉÉ¶É Eò®úEäò ºÉÉ¡ò EòÒ MÉªÉÒ ªÉ½þ vÉ®úiÉÒ <ºÉ xÉªÉÒ {ÉÒføÒ Eäò Ê±ÉB ½þ ÉxÉä ºÉÆÊSÉiÉ Eò®ú ®úJÉÒ ½èþ*


±ÉäÊEòxÉ WÉ®úÉ ªÉ½þ {ÉÚUÚÄô - ¤Éä]äõ Eäò ¦ÉÚJÉä {Éä]õ ¦É®úxÉä EòÒ IÉ¨ÉiÉÉ CªÉÉ <xÉ ºÉÆMÉ¨É®ú É®ú Eäò ¤É®úÉ¨Énäù ªÉÉ

EòÉxÉGòÒ]õ ÊEòªÉä MÉªÉä +ÉÆMÉxÉ EòÉä ½èþ ? {ªÉÉºÉ ºÉä ºÉÆiÉÉxÉ EòÒ VÉÒ¦É ºÉÚJÉiÉä ´ÉHò BEò ¤ÉÚÄnù {ÉÉxÉÒ näùxÉä EòÒ IÉ¨ÉiÉÉ

+ÉVÉ ÊEòºÉ +vÉÖxÉÉiÉxÉ ¨É¶ÉÒxÉ EòÉä ½èþ ? =xÉEäò ®úÉäxÉä ÉÉ±Éä ¡äò¡òbä÷ EòÉä ¶ÉÒiÉ±ÉiÉÉ |ÉnùÉxÉ Eò®úxÉä ¨Éå +ÉVÉ EòÉ

EòÉèxÉ-ºÉÉ ªÉÆjÉ EòÉ¨ÉªÉÉ¤É ½èþ ?

½þ ÉÉ, {ÉÉxÉÒ, ¦ÉÉäVÉxÉ ........... ºÉÆºÉÉ®ú ¨Éå ¨ÉÉxÉ´É +Éè®ú ¤ÉÉEòÒ ºÉ¤É VÉÆiÉÖ-VÉÉxÉ´É®úÉå EòÒ +Îº¨ÉiÉÉ EòÒ

¤ÉÖÊxÉªÉÉnù ½þÉäxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÒ <xÉ iÉÒxÉ SÉÒWÉÉå EòÒ ={ÉVÉ B´ÉÆ ={É±É¤vÉ Eò®úÉxÉä EòÒ IÉ¨ÉiÉÉ ¨ÉÉjÉ BEò º´ÉºlÉ vÉ®úiÉÒ

EòÉä ½èþ* =ºÉÒ vÉ®úiÉÒ ¨ÉÉÄ EòÉä +]Âõ]õÉÊ±ÉEòÉ, ¶ÉÉìË{ÉMÉ FÆò{±ÉCºÉ, ºÉÚ{É®ú ½þÉ<´Éä +ÉÊnù ¤ÉxÉÉEò®ú iÉ½þºÉ-xÉ½þºÉ Eò®ú

näùiÉä ½éþ* Ê¤ÉxÉÉ ÊEòºÉÒ ¯ûEòÉ´É]õ ºÉä Ê´ÉEòÉºÉ +ÉxÉÉ ½èþ iÉÉä ªÉ½þÉÄ ºÉ¤É Eò½þÓ ºÉÚ{É®ú ½þÉ<´Éä SÉÉÊ½þB*

{ÉÊ®úÎºlÉÊiÉ +Éè®ú iÉuùÉ®úÉ ¨ÉÉxÉ´É ®úÉ¶ÉÒ Eäò +ÎºiÉi´É Eäò Ê±ÉB ={É±É¤vÉ vÉ®úiÉÒ ¨Éå 40 |ÉÊiÉ¶ÉiÉ VÉÒ´ÉxÉ

ºÉÆ{ÉÖÎ¹]õ ºÉä ºÉÆ{ÉzÉ ´ÉxÉ-|Énäù¶É +Éè®ú =iÉxÉÉ ½þÒ JÉäiÉÒ ¤ÉÉ®úÒ Eäò Ê±ÉB ¤ÉÉEòÒ ®úJÉxÉÉ ½èþ - Ê´ÉEòÉºÉ EòÉ +vªÉªÉxÉ

näùxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÉ ªÉ½þÓ +ÉÆEòb÷É ½èþ* ¶Éä¹É ®ú½þxÉä ÉÉ±Éä ¨ÉÉjÉ 20 |ÉÊiÉ¶ÉiÉ {É®ú ºÉb÷Eò B´ÉÆ PÉ®ú ºÉÊ½þiÉ ºÉ¦ÉÒ UôÒxÉUô{Éb÷

EòÉ +ÊvÉEòÉ®ú ½èþ* ËEòiÉÖ +ÉVÉ ½þ ÉÉ®äú näù¶É EòÒ ½þÉ±ÉiÉ CªÉÉ ½èþ ? ºÉÚ{É®ú ½þÉ<´Éä Eäò ºÉÉIÉÉiEòÉ®ú Eäò {É½þ±Éä ½þÒ

UôÉä]õÒ-¤Éb÷Ò ±ÉÉJÉÉå ºÉb÷EòÉå EòÉä Ê¨É±ÉÉEò®ú 25 |ÉÊiÉ¶ÉiÉ vÉ®úiÉÒ UôÒxÉ ±ÉÒ MÉªÉÒ ½èþ ; +Éè®ú BEò 25 |ÉÊiÉ¶ÉiÉ

PÉ®ú, ¨ÉEòÉxÉ, nÚùEòÉxÉ °ü{ÉÒ EòÉxÉGòÒ]õ ´ÉxÉ Eäò Ê±ÉB ½þÉä MÉªÉä* <xÉ nùÉäxÉÉå Eäò ¤ÉÒSÉ ¨Éå ¡ÄòºÉEò®ú ½þ ÉÉ®úÉ ´ÉxÉ

ÊºÉEÖòb÷Eò®ú ÊºÉ¡Çò 10 |ÉÊiÉ¶ÉiÉ iÉEò ºÉÒÊ¨ÉiÉ ½þÉä MÉªÉÉ* JÉäiÉÒ ¤ÉÉ®úÒ Eäò Ê±ÉB, JÉÉºÉEò®ú Eäò®ú±É EòÒ ¦ÉÚJÉ

Ê¨É]õÉxÉä EòÉ SÉÉ´É±É {ÉènùÉ Eò®úxÉä Eäò Ê±ÉB +É´É¶ªÉEò JÉäiÉ EòÒ ½þÉ±ÉiÉ Eäò ¤ÉÉ®äú ¨Éå <¶ÉÉ®úÉ xÉ Eò®úxÉÉ +SUôÉ

½èþ*

{Éb÷ÉäºÉÒ MÉÉÄ É ºÉä SÉÉ´É±É +Éè®ú iÉ®úEòÉ®úÒ ±ÉMÉÉiÉÉ®ú +ÉªÉåMÉä - ªÉ½þ ºÉÉäSÉEò®ú +MÉ®ú ªÉä ±ÉÚ]õ-¨ÉÉ®ú ½èþ iÉÉä

+É{É EòÉä MÉ±ÉiÉ¡ò½þ ÉÒ ½þÉä MÉªÉÒ ½èþ* CªÉÉåÊEò =vÉ®ú EòÒ ÎºlÉÊiÉ ¤Énù±É MÉªÉÒ ½èþ +Éè®ú ´É½þÉÄ ¦ÉÒ ¨ÉEòÉxÉ B´ÉÆ

+]Âõ]õÉÊ±ÉEòÉBÄ ¤ÉxÉxÉä ±ÉMÉÒ ½èþ* ªÉ½þ +É¶ÉÉ Eò®úxÉÉ ´ªÉlÉÇ ½èþ ÊEò SÉÉ´É±É +Éè®ú MÉä½ÚÄþ ºÉä ¦É®úÒ MÉÉÊb÷ªÉÉÄ ºÉÒ¨ÉÉ {ÉÉ®ú

Eò®úEäò +ÉªÉåMÉÒ* ´É½þÉÄ Eäò Eò®úÉäb÷Éå ¨ÉWÉnÚù®úÉå EòÉä +{ÉxÉä {Éä]õ {ÉÉ±ÉxÉä EòÒ +xÉÉVÉ {ÉènùÉ Eò®úxÉä Eäò ¤ÉÉnù ½þÒ ´É½þÉÄ

ºÉä =x½åþ ªÉ½þÉÄ +ÉxÉÉ ½èþ*

BEò +Éä®ú +É¤ÉÉnùÒ ÊnùxÉ ´É ÊnùxÉ ±ÉÉJÉÉå Eò®úÉäb÷Éå iÉEò ¤Éfø VÉÉiÉÒ iÉÉä nÚùºÉ®úÒ +Éä®ú ªÉ½þÉÄ ={É±É£vÉ

Ê¨É]Âõ]õÒ BEò <ÆSÉ ¦ÉÒ ¤ÉføiÉÒ xÉ½þÓ* ½þÒ xÉ½þÓ =ºÉEòÉ {ÉènùÉ´ÉÉ®ú ¦ÉÒ |ÉÊiÉÊnùxÉ Eò¨É ½þÉäiÉÉ VÉÉiÉÉ ½èþ* +ÉxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÒ


{ÉÒføÒ EòÉä VÉÒxÉä ±ÉÉªÉEò SÉÉ´É±É, {ÉÉxÉÒ +Éè®ú ½þ ÉÉ EòÉ »ÉÉäiÉ BEò BEò Eò®úEäò EòÉxÉGòÒ]õ Eò®úEäò ¨ÉWÉ¤ÉÚiÉ ÊEòªÉä

VÉÉ ®ú½äþ ½éþ* =ºÉÒ ®úÉºiÉä ºÉä |ÉMÉÊiÉ +Éè®ú Ê´É±ÉÉÊºÉiÉÉ EòÉ ªÉ½þ VÉÖ±ÉÚºÉ ÊxÉEò±ÉiÉÉ ½èþ*

+Éè®ú BEò ¤ÉÉiÉ - ºÉÉ®úÒ vÉ®úiÉÒ EòÉä ¨ÉÚ±ªÉ {É®ú ±ÉäxÉä ªÉÉäMªÉ +¨ÉÒ®ú ±ÉÉäMÉ ªÉ½þÉÄ iÉÉä Eò<Ç ½èþ ±ÉäÊEòxÉ CªÉÉ

=xÉEòÒ ºÉÉ®úÒ ºÉÆ{ÉÊkÉ JÉSÉÇ Eò®úxÉä {É®ú ¦ÉÒ ªÉ½þÉÄ ¨ÉÖ]Âõ]õÒ ¦É®ú SÉÉ´É±É, BEò ¤ÉÚÄnù {ÉÉxÉÒ ªÉÉ BEò xÉx½þÒ-ºÉÒ ½þ ÉÉ

=i{ÉzÉ Eò®ú ºÉEòiÉÉ ? VÉ´ÉÉ¤É +MÉ®ú xÉ½þÓ ½èþ iÉÉä ¨ÉÉxÉ´É +{ÉxÉÒ ºÉÆ{ÉÊkÉ Eäò xÉÉ¨É {É®ú CªÉÉå <iÉxÉÉ PÉ¨ÉÆb÷ Eò®úiÉä

½éþ?

ºÉiªÉxÉÉ¶É Eäò UôÉä®ú {É®ú JÉbä÷ ½þÉäiÉä ´ÉHò ºÉÆ{ÉzÉiÉÉ {É®ú MÉ´ÉÇ Eò®úxÉä ´ÉÉ±Éä ½äþ ¨ÉÉxÉ´É ....... vÉ®úiÉÒ Eäò

+ÉÊJÉ®úÒ {Éäb÷ EòÉ]õ ÊnùªÉä VÉÉxÉä {É®ú, +ÉÊJÉ®úÒ VÉÉxÉ´É®ú {É®ú iÉÒ®ú ±ÉMÉxÉä {É®ú, +ÉÊJÉ®úÒ xÉnùÒ ¦ÉÒ +{ÉxÉÉ ¤É½þÉ´É

¤ÉÆnù Eò®úEäò ÊxÉ¶SÉ±É ½þÉä VÉÉxÉä {É®ú, +ÉÊJÉ®úÒ JÉäiÉ Eäò ]ÖõEòbä÷ ¦ÉÒ Ê¨É]Âõ]õÒ ºÉä {ÉÉäiÉ Ê±ÉªÉä VÉÉxÉä {É®ú .........

iÉ¦ÉÒ +É{ÉEòÒ ºÉ¨ÉZÉ ¨Éå +ÉªÉäMÉÉ ÊEò iÉÖ ½þÉ®úÉ ªÉ½þ vÉxÉ JÉÉxÉä EòÒ SÉÒWÉ xÉ½þÓ, Ê¤É±EÖò±É ´É½þ JÉÉxÉä ªÉÉäMªÉ xÉ½þÓ,

JÉÉxÉä Eäò Ê±ÉB ´É½þ EòÉ¡òÒ xÉ½þÓ, EÖòkÉä ¦ÉÒ ´É½þ JÉÉiÉä xÉ½þÓ*


xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ ¤ÉÒºÉ´ÉÓ ºÉnùÒ Eäò Ê½þxnùÒ Eäò |ÉÊiÉ¦ÉÉvÉxÉÒ EòÊ´É ½éþ * ±É¤PÉ|ÉÊiÉ¹`ö Ê½þxnùÒ ºÉÉÊ½þiªÉEòÉ®úÉå

¨Éå =xÉEòÉ +ÊuùiÉÒªÉ ºlÉÉxÉ ½èþ * ºÉÉÊ½þiªÉ Eäò ºÉÞVÉxÉÉi¨ÉEò IÉäjÉ ¨Éå xÉä®ú¶É VÉÒ EòÉ ªÉÉäMÉnùÉxÉ +¨ÉÚ±ªÉ ®ú½þÉ

½èþ * ºÉ¨ÉEòÉ±ÉÒxÉ EòÊ´ÉiÉÉ ¨Éå +É{ÉEòÉ EòÉ¡òÒ +ºÉ®ú {Éb÷É ½èþ * ´Éä xÉªÉÒ EòÊ´ÉiÉÉ Eäò +OÉnÚùiÉ ¦ÉÒ ®ú½äþ ½éþ *

=xÉEòÒ ®úSÉxÉÉ+Éå EòÉ BEò +±ÉMÉ ºÉÉèxnùªÉÇ ¶ÉÉºjÉ ½èþ, ÊVÉºÉ¨Éå xÉªÉÒ EòÊ´ÉiÉÉ Eäò xÉªÉä |ÉÊiÉ¨ÉÉxÉÉå EòÉ xÉªÉÉ

+É±ÉäJÉ ½èþ * EòÊ´É xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ EòÒ xÉªÉÒ +xiÉoùùÎ¹]õ ®ú½þÒ ½èþ * =xÉEòÉ oùÎ¹]õEòÉähÉ +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ´ÉèYÉÉÊxÉEò

+Éè®ú BäÊiÉ½þÉÊºÉEò ®ú½þÉ ½èþ * ¡ò±ÉiÉ: =xÉEòÒ EòÊ´ÉiÉÉ xÉªÉÒ oùÎ¹]õ ºÉä ºÉÆ{ÉzÉ ½Öþ<Ç ½èþ * <xÉEòÒ JÉÚÊ¤ÉªÉÉå {É®ú

oùÎ¹]õ{ÉÉiÉ Eò®úEäò b÷Éì. ºÉxiÉÉä¹ÉEÖò¨ÉÉ®ú ÊiÉ´ÉÉ®úÒ EòÉ EòlÉxÉ ½èþ - “xÉªÉÒ EòÊ´ÉiÉÉ Eäò ºÉ¶ÉHò ½þºiÉÉIÉ®ú xÉ®äú¶É

¨Éä½þiÉÉ xÉªÉä ¨ÉÉxÉ´É¨ÉÚ±ªÉ, ¦ÉÉ´É¤ÉÉävÉ +Éè®ú ÊSÉxiÉxÉ EòÒ ºÉÉ¨ÉÉÊVÉEò ¦ÉÚÊ¨ÉEòÉ ±ÉäEò®ú xÉ´ÉÒxÉ |ÉiÉÒEòÉå, ={É¨ÉÉxÉÉä,

+|ÉºiÉÖiÉ Ê´ÉvÉÉxÉÉå +Éè®ú Ë¤É¤ÉÉå Eäò ¨ÉÉvªÉ¨É ºÉä +{ÉxÉÒ ¤ÉÉiÉ Eò½þxÉä ¨Éå JªÉÉÊiÉ|ÉÉ{iÉ ½éþ *” 1

+ÉÊnù EòÊ´É ºÉä ±ÉäEò®ú +¤ÉiÉEò Eäò EòÊ´ÉªÉÉå iÉEò EòÒ ®úSÉxÉÉ+Éå ¨Éå Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ {ÉÊ®úEò±{ÉxÉÉ ½èþ *

EòÉÊ±ÉnùÉºÉ, ¦É´É¦ÉÚÊiÉ, ºÉÚ®ú, iÉÖ±ÉºÉÒ, |ÉºÉÉnù, ÊnùxÉEò®ú, vÉ¨ÉÇ ÉÒ®ú ¦ÉÉ®úiÉÒ VÉèºÉä ÊVÉiÉxÉä ½þÒ |ÉÊiÉÊxÉÊvÉ EòÊ´ÉªÉÉå

EòÒ Eò<Ç ºÉÞÎ¹]õªÉÉÄ Ê¨ÉlÉEòÉå ºÉä ½Öþ<Ç ½éþ * <x½þÓ ®úSÉxÉÉ+Éå ºÉä {ÉÉ`öEòÉå EòÒ YÉÉxÉ iÉÞ¹hÉÉ ¶ÉÉxiÉ ½Öþ<Ç iÉÉä EòÊ´ÉªÉÉå

EòÒ Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ EòÉ´ªÉ oùÎ¹]õ ¦ÉÒ ºÉ¡ò±ÉiÉÉ |ÉÉ{iÉ Eò®ú ºÉEòÒ ½èþ * b÷Éì. Eò¨É±ÉÉ|ÉºÉÉnù {ÉÉhbä÷ªÉ EòÉ EòlÉxÉ ½èþ

- “´ÉºiÉÖ+Éå EòÉ +Éº´ÉÉnù ªÉÉ ={ÉªÉÉäMÉ |ÉlÉ¨ÉiÉ: Ê´É¶Éä¹É ´ªÉÊHò ¨Éå ½þÒ VÉx¨É ±ÉäiÉÉ ½èþ +Éè®ú EòÉ±ÉÉxiÉ®ú ¨Éå

´É½þ ºÉÉ¨ÉÉxªÉ VÉxÉ Eäò YÉÉxÉ EòÒ ºÉÒ¨ÉÉ ¨Éå |É´Éä¶É Eò®úiÉÉ ½èþ * VÉMÉiÉ Eäò |ÉÊiÉ ºÉVÉMÉ-oùÎ¹]õ +Éè®ú ¤ÉÖÊrù, ®úSÉxÉÉ

EòÒ ºÉ¨ÉOÉ ºÉ|ÉÉhÉiÉÉ EòÉä +ÉEòÉ®ú näùEò®ú +iÉÒiÉ ºÉä +ÉMÉiÉ iÉEò =ºÉEäò =qäù¶ªÉ, ={ÉªÉÉäMÉ +Éè®ú ¨ÉÚ±ªÉ EòÉ

Ê´ÉºiÉÉ®ú Eò®úiÉÒ ½èþ * +iÉ: ÊEòºÉÒ ¦ÉÒ ºÉÞVÉxÉ EòÉ ¨ÉÚ±ªÉ ªÉÉ ={ÉªÉÉäMÉ - ¶ÉÉävÉ ¨ÉÉxÉ´É ¨ÉxÉ EòÒ YÉÉxÉÉi¨ÉEò

={É±ÉÎ¤PÉ ½èþ *” 2

xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ EòÒ Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ EòÉ´ªÉoùÎ¹]õ iÉlÉÉ ‘ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ BEò ®úÉiÉ’

BºÉ.Ê´ÉVÉªÉ¨¨ÉÉË½þnùÒ Ê´É¦ÉÉMÉ


{ÉÉè®úÉÊhÉEò +ÉJªÉÉxÉ EòÉä ºÉ¨ÉEòÉ±ÉÒxÉ ºÉxnù¦ÉÇ ¨Éå føÉ±ÉxÉÉ Ê¨ÉlÉEò ½èþ * VÉxÉ VÉÒ´ÉxÉ EòÒ ´ÉÉºiÉÊ´ÉEòiÉÉ

Ê¨ÉlÉEò ¨Éå nùÌ¶ÉiÉ ½þÉäiÉÒ ½èþ * VÉxÉ VÉÒ´ÉxÉ Eäò ªÉlÉÉlÉÇ EòÉä nùÌ¶ÉiÉ Eò®úÉEò®ú, ºÉÉ¨ÉÊªÉEò ªÉÖMÉÒxÉ ¨ÉÉxªÉiÉÉ+Éå EòÉä

{ÉÊ®ú±ÉÊIÉiÉ Eò®ú Ê¨ÉlÉEò ½þ Éä¶ÉÉ +Ê´ÉÊ®úiÉ ½þÉäiÉä ½éþ * {ÉÉè®úÉÊhÉEò +ÉJªÉÉxÉ EòÉä ºÉ¨ÉEòÉ±ÉÒxÉ ºÉxnù¦ÉÇ ¨Éå ±ÉÉEò®ú

{ÉÉè®úÉÊhÉEò {ÉÉjÉÉå EòÉä +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ¨ÉÉxÉ´É EòÒ ¦ÉÚÊ¨É {É®ú JÉb÷É Eò®úEäò |ÉºiÉÖiÉ, EòÉ´ªÉ {ÉÊ®úEò±{ÉxÉÉ, nù®ú+ºÉ±É

¸Éä¹`ö EòÊ´ÉªÉÉå EòÒ ºÉÉlÉÇEò Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ EòÉ´ªÉ oùÎ¹]õ EòÒ {ÉÊ®úSÉÉªÉEò ½èþ *

+ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ¨ÉÉxÉ´É ¨ÉxÉ +ÊxÉÎ¶SÉiÉiÉÉ +Éè®ú +É¶ÉÆEòÉ ºÉä OÉºiÉ ½éþ * BäºÉÒ +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ªÉÖMÉ SÉäiÉxÉÉ EòÉä

=VÉÉMÉ®ú Eò®úxÉä EäòÊ±ÉB xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ xÉä +{ÉxÉÒ EòÉ´ªÉEÞòÊiÉ ‘ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ BEò ®úÉiÉ’ EòÉ ºÉÞVÉxÉ ÊEòªÉÉ ½èþ *

<ºÉ¨Éå {ÉÚhÉÇ +ÊvÉEòÉ®ú Eäò ºÉÉlÉ EòÊ´É xÉä Ê¨ÉlÉEò EòÉ |ÉªÉÉäMÉ ÊEòªÉÉ ½èþ * ¸ÉÒ |É¨ÉÉänù ÊjÉ´ÉänùÒ EòÒ ®úÉªÉ ¨Éå

“ ¸ÉÒ xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ VÉ¤É ¦ÉÒ EòÉ´ªÉ ªÉÉ EòÉ´ªÉÉi¨ÉEòiÉÉ {É®ú Ê´ÉSÉÉ®ú Eò®úiÉä ½éþ iÉ¤É EòÉ´ªÉ Eäò ¤É½þÉxÉä ¨ÉxÉÖ¹ªÉ EòÒ

ºÉÚI¨É {Éb÷iÉÉ±É ¨Éå ¦ÉÒ ´ªÉºiÉ ½þÉä VÉÉiÉä ½éþ *” 3 xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ xÉä ºÉVÉÇxÉÉi¨ÉEò ºiÉ®ú {É®ú +{ÉxÉÒ ºÉÉ®úÒ ÊSÉxiÉÉªÉå

¨ÉxÉÖ¹ªÉ Eäò |ÉÊiÉ ºÉ¨ÉÌ{ÉiÉ EòÒ ½èþ *

®úÉ¨ÉÉªÉhÉ EòlÉÉ {É®ú +ÉvÉÉÊ®úiÉ Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ EòÉ´ªÉ ‘ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ BEò ®úÉiÉ’ Eäò ¨ÉÉvªÉ¨É ºÉä xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ

xÉä ´ÉiÉÇ ÉÉxÉ ¨ÉÉxÉ´É Eäò ¶ÉÆEòÉEÖò±É ¨ÉxÉ +Éè®ú Ê´Éb÷ ¤ÉxÉÉ+Éå ºÉä Ê´ÉSÉÊ±ÉiÉ +´ÉºlÉÉ Eäò |ÉÊiÉ +{ÉxÉÒ VÉÉMÉ°üEòiÉÉ

ÊnùJÉÉªÉÒ ½èþ * ®úÉ¨É Eäò ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉÒ SÉÊ®újÉ EòÉä ºÉiÉEÇòiÉÉ ºÉä ÊSÉÊjÉiÉ Eò®úiÉä ºÉ¨ÉªÉ EòÊ´É EòÉ oùÎ¹]õEòÉähÉ ®úÉ¨ÉÉªÉhÉÒªÉ

Ê¨ÉlÉEòÉå uùÉ®úÉ ºÉÉ¨ÉÊªÉEò ªÉÖMÉ ¤ÉÉävÉ ´ªÉÆÊVÉiÉ Eò®úxÉÉ ½èþ * <ºÉÊ±ÉB {ÉÉè®úÉÊhÉEò +Énù¶ÉÇ ÉÉxÉ ®úÉ¨É Eäò ºlÉÉxÉ {É®ú

BEò ºÉÉvÉÉ®úhÉ ´ªÉÊHò Eäò °ü{É ¨Éå ®úÉ¨É +ÉiÉä ½éþ * b÷Éì. =nùªÉ´ÉÒ®ú ¶É¨ÉÉÇ ‘=´ÉÒ¶É’ Eäò ¨ÉÉxªÉiÉÉxÉÖºÉÉ®ú “|É¤ÉxvÉ

EòÉ´ªÉ Eäò ®úÉ¨É ºÉ´ÉÇlÉÉ ¨ÉÉxÉ´ÉÒªÉ ¦ÉÉ´ÉxÉÉ +Éè®ú +xÉÖ¦ÉÚÊiÉªÉÉå Eäò ´ÉÉ½þEò ½éþ * EòÊ´É xÉä =xÉEòÉ +´ÉiÉÉ®úÒ ¨ÉÖJÉÉè]õÉ

=iÉÉ®úEò®ú ºÉÉ¨ÉÉxªÉ ¦ÉÉ´ÉxÉÉ Eäò ÊxÉEò]õ ±ÉÉ ÊnùªÉÉ ½èþ * ” 4

ªÉ½þ ®úÉ¨É ÊEòºÉÒ ¦ÉÒ |ÉEòÉ®ú EòÒ º´ÉÉlÉÇ {ÉÚÌiÉ EäòÊ±ÉB VÉxÉ Ê´ÉxÉÉ¶É EòÉ ¦ÉÉMÉÒnùÉ®ú ¤ÉxÉxÉÉ xÉ½þÓ

SÉÉ½þiÉÉ * ªÉ½þÉÄ {ÉÉè®úÉÊhÉEò Ê¨ÉlÉEòÉå uùÉ®úÉ ºÉ¨ÉEòÉ±ÉÒxÉ ºÉxnù¦ÉÉç EòÉä ÊxÉ°üÊ{ÉiÉ Eò®úxÉä EòÒ EòÊ´É EòÒ SÉÉ½þ

oùÎ¹]õMÉiÉ ½èþ * <ºÉÊ±ÉB ®úÉ¨É {ÉÚUôiÉä ½éþ -

“ ´ªÉÊHò EòÉ ´ÉxÉ´ÉÉºÉ

{ÉÊ®úVÉxÉ +Éè®ú {ÉÖ®úVÉxÉ EäòÊ±ÉB

+Ê¦É¶ÉÉ{É CªÉÉå ¤ÉxÉ VÉÉªÉä ?


´ªÉÊHòMÉiÉ ¨Éä®úÒ ºÉ¨ÉºªÉÉªÉå

CªÉÉå BäÊiÉ½þÉÊºÉEò EòÉ®úhÉÉå EòÉä VÉx¨É nåù* ” 5

ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉÉi¨ÉEò |É´ÉÞÊkÉ Eäò +ÉvÉÉ®ú {É®ú ®úÊSÉiÉ <ºÉ ®úSÉxÉÉ ¨Éå +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ªÉÖMÉ Eäò ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉÒ B´ÉÆ JÉÎhb÷iÉ

´ªÉÊHòi´É EòÉä ®úÉ¨É Eäò SÉÊ®újÉ uùÉ®úÉ |ÉºiÉÖiÉ ÊEòªÉÉ MÉªÉÉ ½èþ * EòÊ´É xÉä Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ +ÉvÉÉ®ú {É®ú ´ÉèªÉÊHòEò B´ÉÆ

ºÉÉ¨ÉÉÊVÉEò oùÎ¹]õ ºÉä ¨ÉÉxÉ´É EòÉ Ê´É¶±Éä¹ÉhÉ ºÉ¡ò±ÉiÉÉ ºÉä ÊEòªÉÉ ½èþ * ÊxÉhÉÇªÉ ±ÉäxÉä ¨Éå +ºÉ¨ÉlÉÇ ®úÉ¨É Eäò ¨ÉxÉ

¨Éå nùÉä Ê´É®úÉävÉÒ ¦ÉÉ´É ]õEò®úÉiÉä ½éþ iÉÉä ´É½þ JÉÎhb÷iÉ ´ªÉÊHòi´É´ÉÉ±ÉÉ ¤ÉxÉ VÉÉiÉÉ ½èþ -

“nùÉä ºÉiªÉ

nùÉä ºÉÆEò±{É

nùÉä nùÉä +ÉºlÉÉªÉå

´ªÉÊHò ¨Éå ½þÒ

+|ÉÉ¨ÉÉÊhÉiÉ ´ªÉÊHò {ÉènùÉ ½þÉä MÉªÉÉ ½èþ * ” 6

¨Éä½þiÉÉ VÉÒ xÉä <ºÉ |É¤ÉxvÉ EòÉ´ªÉ ¨Éå Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ EòÉ´ªÉ -oùÎ¹]õ ºÉä ºÉ¨ÉEòÉ±ÉÒxÉ SÉäiÉxÉÉ EòÉä =VÉÉMÉ®ú

Eò®úxÉä Eäò ºÉÉlÉ ½þÒ VÉÒ´ÉxÉ EòÒ ¶ÉÉ·ÉiÉ ºÉ¨ÉºªÉÉ+Éå +Éè®ú ¨ÉÚ±ªÉÉå EòÒ |ÉÊiÉ¹`öÉ ¦ÉÒ EòÒ ½èþ * ªÉÖrù EòÒ ºÉ¨ÉºªÉÉ

Eäò ºÉxnù¦ÉÇ ¨Éå ®úÉ¨É |É¶xÉÉiÉÖ®ú ½éþ iÉÉä +xªÉ {ÉÉjÉÉå Eäò uùÉ®úÉ iÉEÇò EòÉ ºÉ¨ÉÉvÉÉxÉ ªÉÖÊHò ºÉÊ½þiÉ ½þÉäiÉÉ ½èþ * ªÉ½þÒ

iÉÉä EòÊ´É EòÒ EòÉ´ªÉ oùÎ¹]õ EòÒ ºÉÉlÉÇEòiÉÉ ½èþ * ªÉ½þ ®úSÉxÉÉ ªÉÖMÉÒxÉ ºÉxnù¦ÉÉç EòÉä +ÉvÉÉ®ú °ü{É ¨Éå OÉ½þhÉ Eò®úEäò

Ê±ÉJÉÒ MÉªÉÒ ½èþ * ºÉÉ¨ÉÊªÉEò ªÉÖMÉ ¤ÉÉävÉ EòÒ +Ê¦É´ªÉÊHò ¦ÉÆÊMÉ¨ÉÉ ºÉä {ÉÚhÉÇ <ºÉ ®úSÉxÉÉ EòÒ ¨ÉÚ±ªÉ´ÉkÉÉ iÉEÇò ®úÊ½þiÉ

½þÒ ½èþ * |É¦ÉÉEò®ú ¶É¨ÉÉÇ EòÉ ¨ÉÚ±ªÉÉÆEòxÉ Ê¤É±ÉEÖò±É ºÉ¨ÉÒSÉÒxÉ ½èþ - “ ‘ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ BEò ®úÉiÉ’ xÉ®äú¶É EòÒ BEò

BäºÉÒ EÞòÊiÉ ½èþ ÊVÉºÉ¨Éå ®úÉ¨É Eäò ¨ÉÉvªÉ¨É ºÉä +ÉVÉ Eäò ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉOÉºiÉ ´ªÉÊHòi´É EòÉä ÊxÉ°üÊ{ÉiÉ ÊEòªÉÉ MÉªÉÉ ½èþ *

<ºÉ |ÉEòÉ®ú xÉ®äú¶É EòÒ EòÉ´ªÉ EÞòÊiÉªÉÉÄ |ÉEÞòÊiÉ¤ÉÉävÉ ºÉä |ÉÉ®Æú¦É ½þÉäEò®ú +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ¤ÉÉävÉ Eäò =ºÉ ¶ÉÒ¹ÉÇ {É®ú

|ÉÊiÉÎ¹`ööiÉ ½èþ VÉ½þÉÄ ºÉ¨ÉEòÉ±ÉÒxÉ {ÉÊ®ú Éä¶É ¨Éå º{ÉÆÊnùiÉ, Ê´É¦ÉHò ¨ÉÉxÉºÉ, ]Úõ]õiÉÒ ¤ÉxÉiÉÒ ¨ÉÉxªÉiÉÉªÉå, ¦ÉÊ´É¹ªÉ

EòÉ ºÉÚªÉÉænùªÉÒ Ê´É·ÉÉºÉ +Éè®ú xÉªÉä ¨ÉÚ±ªÉÉå EòÒ ºlÉÉ{ÉxÉÉ Eäò ºÉxnù¦ÉÇ ¨ÉÖJÉÊ®úiÉ ½þÉä =`öäö ½éþ * ” 7 ºÉÉ¨ÉÊªÉEò

VÉÒ´ÉxÉ oùÎ¹]õ EòÒ ´ªÉÉJªÉÉ EäòÊ±ÉB <Ç·É®úÒªÉ {ÉÉjÉ {ÉÉè®úÉÊhÉEò ®úÉ¨É EòÉä Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ +ÉvÉÉ®ú ¨ÉÉxÉEò®ú, xÉ®äú¶É VÉÒ

xÉä ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ BEò ®úÉiÉ ¨Éå VÉÉä ¨ÉÚ±ªÉ |ÉÊiÉ¹`ööÉ EòÒ ½èþ, ´É½þ =xÉEòÒ Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ EòÉ´ªÉ oùùÎ¹]õ EòÉ =kÉ¨É

MÉÖhÉ ½èþ *


‘ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ BEò ®úÉiÉ’ ¨Éå ®úÉ¨É EòÉä |É¶xÉÉå ºÉä ´ªÉÉEÖò±É B´ÉÆ Ê´É¦ÉÉÊVÉiÉ ªÉÉ JÉÎhb÷iÉ ´ªÉÊHòi´É´ÉÉ±Éä

|ÉYÉÉ{ÉÖ û¹É Eäò °ü{É ¨Éå |ÉºiÉÖiÉ ÊEòªÉÉ MÉªÉÉ ½èþ * <ºÉ¨Éå ®úÉ¨É +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ¨ÉÉxÉ´É EòÉ |ÉÊiÉÊxÉÊvÉi´É Eò®úiÉä ½éþ *

½þ ÉÉ®äú VÉÉxÉä ¨ÉÉxÉä Ê¨ÉlÉEò ¨Éå ®úÉ¨É ¶ÉÊHò, ¶ÉÒ±É +Éè®ú ºÉÉèxnùªÉÇ ºÉ¨ÉÎx´ÉiÉ näù´ÉiÉÉ ½èþ ¨ÉMÉ®ú ªÉ½þÉÄ xÉ®äú¶É VÉÒ xÉä

®úÉ¨É Eäò SÉÊ®újÉ ¨Éå ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉOÉºiÉiÉÉ +Éè®ú uùxuùOÉºiÉiÉÉ EòÒ +Ê¦É´ªÉÆVÉxÉÉ EòÒ ½èþ * {É®Æú{É®úÉMÉiÉ ®úÉ¨ÉEòlÉÉ ¨Éå

°ü{ÉÉÊªÉiÉ ®úÉ¨É Eäò SÉÊ®újÉ ¨Éå <x½þÓ ´ÉèªÉÊHòEò Ê´É¶Éä¹ÉiÉÉ+Éå Eäò WÉÊ®úB +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEòiÉÉ¤ÉÉävÉ EòÉä ÊxÉ°üÊ{ÉiÉ ÊEòªÉÉ

MÉªÉÉ ½èþ * ªÉ½þ EòÊ´É EäòÊ±ÉB +iªÉxiÉ EòÊ`öxÉ EòÉ¨É lÉÉ, CªÉÉåÊEò ®úÉ¨É Eäò ´ªÉÊHòi´É Eäò ºÉÉlÉ VÉÖb÷Ò ½Öþ<Ç ¸Éä¹`öiÉÉ

<iÉxÉÒ MÉÊ®ú ÉÉªÉÖHò lÉÒ * ®úÉ¨É Eäò Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ SÉÊ®újÉ ¨Éå ¤Énù±ÉÉ´É näùEò®ú EòÊ´É xÉä ºÉ¨ÉEòÉ±ÉÒxÉ {ÉÊ®ú Éä¶É Eäò

+ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ¤ÉÉävÉ EòÉ ºÉÞVÉxÉ ÊEòªÉÉ ½èþ * ‘ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ BEò ®úÉiÉ’ EòÒ ¦ÉÚÊ¨ÉEòÉ ¨Éå EòÊ´É xÉä Eò½þÉ ½èþ - “ EÞòÊiÉ

¨Éå ®úÉ¨É +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò |ÉVÉÉ EòÉ |ÉÊiÉÊxÉÊvÉi´É Eò®úiÉä ½éþ * ªÉÖrù +ÉVÉ EòÒ |É¨ÉÖJÉ ºÉ¨ÉºªÉÉ ½èþ * ºÉÆ¦É´ÉiÉ: ºÉ¦ÉÒ ªÉÖMÉ

EòÒ <ºÉ Ê´É¦ÉÒÊ¹ÉEòÉ EòÉ ºÉ¨ÉÉÊVÉEò B´ÉÆ ´ÉèªÉÊHòEò vÉ®úÉiÉ±É {É®ú ºÉ¦ÉÒ ªÉÖMÉÉå ¨Éå ¦ÉÉäMÉÉ VÉÉiÉÉ ®ú½þÉ +Éè®ú <ºÉÊ±ÉB

®úÉ¨É EòÉä ¦ÉÒ BäºÉÉ ½þÒ BEòi´É näùEò®ú |É¶xÉ =`öÉªÉä MÉªÉä * ÊVÉºÉ |ÉEòÉ®ú EÖòUô |É¶xÉ ºÉxÉÉiÉxÉ ½þÉäiÉä ½éþ =ºÉÒ |ÉEòÉ®ú

EÖòUô |ÉYÉÉ{ÉÖ û¹É ¦ÉÒ ºÉxÉÉiÉxÉ |ÉiÉÒEò ½þÉäiÉä ½éþ * ®úÉ¨É BºÉä ½þÒ BEò |ÉYÉÉ |ÉiÉÒEò ½èþ * ” 8

{ÉÖ®úÉhÉ SÉÊ®újÉ ®úÉ¨É EòÉä EòÉ±É EòÒ ºÉÒ¨ÉÉ+Éå ºÉä ÊxÉEòÉ±É Eò®ú ºÉÉvÉÉ®úhÉ ¨ÉxÉÖ¹ªÉ Eäò °ü{É ¨Éå |ÉºiÉÖiÉ

Eò®úxÉä ¨Éå, ¨Éä½þiÉÉ VÉÒ EòÒ Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ EòÉ´ªÉ -oùÎ¹]õ xÉä ºÉ¡ò±ÉiÉÉ {ÉÚhÉÇ nùÉÊªÉi´É ÊxÉ¦ÉÉªÉÉ ½èþ * <ºÉ¨Éå EòÊ´É xÉä

Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ +ÉªÉÉäVÉxÉ ºÉä ¨ÉÉxÉ´É¨ÉxÉ EòÒ º´ÉºlÉ ÎºlÉÊiÉ EòÉ |ÉºiÉÖiÉÒEò®úhÉ ÊEòªÉÉ ½èþ * ®úÉ¨É EòÉä ºÉiªÉ nù¶ÉÇxÉ

näùEò®ú, ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ¨ÉÖHò ¤ÉxÉÉxÉä EòÉ EòÉªÉÇ <ºÉ¨Éå +xªÉ {ÉÉjÉ Eò®úiÉä ½éþ, ÊVÉxÉ¨Éå ½þxÉÖ ÉÉxÉ, ±ÉI¨ÉhÉ, Ê´É¦ÉÒ¹ÉhÉ, nù¶É®úlÉ

+Éè®ú VÉ]õÉªÉÚ EòÒ +Éi¨ÉÉªÉå |É¨ÉÖJÉ ½éþ * ªÉ½þÉÄ ¦ÉÒ xÉ®äú¶É VÉÒ EòÒ Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ {ÉÊ®úEò±{ÉxÉÉ ºÉÉlÉÇEò ºÉÉÊ¤ÉiÉ ½Öþ<Ç

½èþ * Ê´É¦ÉÒ¹ÉhÉ EòÉ Eò½þxÉÉ ½èþ -

“ ªÉÖrù

¨ÉxjÉhÉÉ xÉ½þÓ

BEò nù¶ÉÇxÉ ½èþ ®úÉ¨É !

+ÎxiÉ¨É ¨ÉÉMÉÇ ½èþ

º´Éi´É +Éè®ú +ÊvÉEòÉ®ú +VÉÇxÉ EòÉ *

ÊEòºÉÒ ÊEòºÉÒ ªÉÖMÉ ¨Éå

ªÉÖrù ½þÒ

+ÎxiÉ¨É ºÉiªÉ, nù¶ÉÇxÉ ½Öþ+É Eò®úiÉÉ Ê¨ÉjÉ *” 9


{ÉÊ®úiÉÉ{É, {É¶SÉÉiÉÉ{É, ´ÉänùxÉÉ, nÖùJÉ +ÉÊnù ºÉä {ÉÒÊb÷iÉ ®úÉ¨É Ë½þºÉÉ B´ÉÆ |ÉÊiÉË½þºÉÉ ºÉä {ÉÚhÉÇ ªÉÖrù EòÉä

]õÉ±ÉxÉÉ SÉÉ½þiÉä ½éþ * <ºÉ¨Éå ÊxÉÊ½þiÉ ºÉiªÉ-+ºÉiªÉ, ¶ÉÖ¦É-+¶ÉÖ¦É, ¶ÉÉÎxiÉ-+¶ÉÉÎxiÉ {É®ú ´Éä Ê´ÉSÉÉ®ú ÉÉxÉ ½éþ,

ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉOÉºiÉ ½éþ * iÉ¤É nù¶É®úlÉ EòÒ |ÉäiÉÉi¨ÉÉ =x½åþ ºÉ¨ÉZÉÉiÉÒ ½èþ -

“ {ÉÖjÉ ¨Éä®äú

ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ ªÉÉ ¶ÉÆEòÉ xÉ½þÓ

Eò¨ÉÇ ½þÒ =kÉ®ú ½èþ

ªÉ¶É ÊVÉºÉEòÒ UôÉªÉÉ ½èþ

=ºÉ Eò¨ÉÇ EòÉä ´É®úÉä *” 10

ºÉÉ¨ÉÊªÉEò {ÉÊ®úÎºlÉÊiÉªÉÉå Eäò |ÉÊiÉ ºÉVÉMÉiÉÉ ºÉä Ê´ÉSÉÉ®ú Eò®ú ºÉ¨ÉºªÉÉ{ÉÚÌiÉ Eäò |ÉÊiÉ VÉÉMÉ°üEò BEò

xÉ´ªÉ ´ªÉÊHòi´É ‘½þxÉÖ ÉÉxÉ’ ¨Éå nùÌ¶ÉiÉ ½èþ * ªÉ½þ ¦ÉÒ xÉ®äú¶É VÉÒ EòÒ EòÉ´ªÉ -oùÎ¹]õ, Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ {ÉÊ®úEò±{ÉxÉÉ Eäò

IÉäjÉ ¨Éå ºÉ¡ò±ÉiÉÉ ½þÉÊºÉ±É Eò®úxÉä EòÒ ºÉ¤ÉÚiÉ ½èþ * +xÉÖÊSÉiÉ EòÉªÉÇ Eò®úxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÉå EòÉä Ê¨É]õÉxÉä EäòÊ±ÉB +ÉèÊSÉiªÉ{ÉÚhÉÇ

Eò¨ÉÇ EòÒ +É´É¶ªÉEòiÉÉ {É®ú ½þxÉÖ ÉÉxÉ VÉÒ WÉÉä®ú näùiÉä ½éþ -

“ºÉÆ¦É´É ½èþ

½þ ÉÉ®äú EòÉ®úhÉ ½þÒ

+xÉÉMÉiÉ ªÉÖrùÉå EòÒ xÉÓ´É {Ébä÷

{É®ú

<ºÉ b÷®ú ºÉä

CªÉÉ ½þ É xªÉÉªÉ +Éè®ú +ÊvÉEòÉ®ú UôÉäb÷ nåù !

xÉ½þÓ

xÉ½þÓ ¨É½þÉ®úÉVÉ !

ºÉ¨ÉªÉ ½þÒ Eò®äúMÉÉ |ÉÊiÉEòÉ®ú

½þ®ú¤ÉÉ®ú

+xÉÖÊSÉiÉ EòÉ *” 11


®úÉ¨É ºÉÉvÉÉ®úhÉ ¨ÉÉxÉ´É EòÒ ¦ÉÉÎxiÉ +xÉäEò ¶ÉÆEòÉ+Éå, ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉÉå ºÉä ÊvÉ®úÉ ½Öþ+É {ÉÒÊb÷iÉ ½èþ * BEò

Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ iÉi´É EòÉä +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ºÉxnù¦ÉÉç ºÉä VÉÉäb÷Eò®ú EòÊ´É xÉä +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò EòÊ´ÉiÉÉ EòÒ BEò ¨É½þi´É{ÉÚhÉÇ ={É±ÉÎ¤PÉ

Eäò °ü{É ¨Éå ‘ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ BEò ®úÉiÉ’ EòÉ ºÉÞVÉxÉ ÊEòªÉÉ * ªÉ½þÉÄ =xÉEòÒ EòÉ´ªÉ{É®úEò oùÎ¹]õ {ÉÉè®úÉÊhÉEò Ê¨ÉlÉEòÉå

EòÉä |ÉºiÉÖiÉ Eò®úxÉä EòÒ +{ÉäIÉÉ ºÉ¨ÉEòÉ±ÉÒxÉ ºÉxnù¦ÉÉç EòÉä ªÉÉJªÉÉ näùxÉä EòÒ +Éä®ú ÉÖb÷Ò * ªÉÖrù +Éè®ú ºÉÆPÉ¹ÉÇ ½þ Éä¶ÉÉ

½þÉäiÉä ®ú½þiÉä ½éþ * ±ÉäÊEòxÉ ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ªÉÖMÉ EòÒ ={ÉVÉ ½èþ * ®úÉ¨É Eäò Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ SÉÊ®újÉ Eäò ¨ÉÉvªÉ¨É ºÉä EòÊ´É

xÉä <ºÉÒ ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÉä +ÊvÉEò =VÉÉMÉ®ú ÊEòªÉÉ ½èþ * +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò |ÉVÉÉ EòÉ |ÉÊiÉÊxÉÊvÉi´É Eò®úxÉä ÉÉ±Éä ®úÉ¨É Eäò SÉÊ®újÉ

¨Éå ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ +ÊxÉ´ÉÉªÉÇiÉÉ WÉ°ü®ú ½èþ *

ªÉÖrù +Éè®ú ºÉÆPÉ¹ÉÇ ½þ®ú ªÉÖMÉ ¨Éå ®ú½äþ ½éþ, ±ÉäÊEòxÉ ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ªÉÖMÉ Eäò Ê´Éb÷ ¤ÉxÉÉ¨ÉªÉ VÉÒ´ÉxÉ Eäò

+xiÉuÇùxuù EòÒ |ÉÊiÉv´ÉÊxÉ ½èþ * ªÉ½þ ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ ®úÉ¨É Eäò SÉÊ®újÉ ¨Éå Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ {ÉÊ®ú Éä¶É ºÉä +Ê¦É´ªÉHò ½þÉäEò®ú +ÊvÉEò

ºlÉÉªÉÒ ½þÉä MÉªÉÉ ½èþ * CªÉÉåÊEò ‘ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ BEò ®úÉiÉ’ EòÉ ®úÉ¨É <Ç·É®ú xÉ½þÓ ¤ÉÎ±Eò +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ÉÉxÉ´É EòÉ |ÉiÉÒEò

½èþ * b÷Éì. ®úÉ¨ÉEò¨É±É®úÉªÉ Eäò Eò½äþ +xÉÖºÉÉ®ú “®úÉ¨É ÉxÉÖ¹ªÉ ½éþ +Éè®ú BEò É½þÉxÉ SÉÊ®újÉ´ÉÉ±Éä É½þÉ¨ÉÉxÉ´É * =xÉEòÉ

¨ÉÚ±É º´É¦ÉÉ´É Eò¯ûhÉÉ, |Éä É +Éè®ú +Ë½þºÉÉ EòÉ ½èþ *” 12 Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ {ÉÊ®ú Éä¶É Éå {ÉÉè®úÉÊhÉEò ®úÉ¨É EòÉä ÊuùvÉÉOÉºiÉ

+ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ¨ÉÉxÉ´É Eäò °ü{É ¨Éå ÊSÉÊjÉiÉ Eò®ú EòÊ´É xÉä ºÉ¨ÉEòÉ±ÉÒxÉ |ÉÉºÉÆÊMÉEòiÉÉ EòÉ ÊxÉ´ÉÉÇ½þ ÊEòªÉÉ ½èþ * xÉ®äú¶É

VÉÒ EòÒ EòÉ´ªÉ oùÎ¹]õ xÉä Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ ªÉÉäVÉxÉÉ ¨Éå ¤É½ÖþiÉ ½þÒ ºÉiÉEÇòiÉÉ ºÉä EòÉªÉÇ ÊEòªÉÉ ½èþ -

“+xªÉ |ÉÉªÉÎ¶SÉiÉ Eò®åú ¨Éä®äúÊ±ÉB

nÖùJÉ ¦ÉÉäMÉä,

...........

´ªÉÊHò EòÉ ´ÉxÉ´ÉÉºÉ

{ÉÊ®úVÉxÉ +Éè®ú {ÉÖ®úVÉxÉ EäòÊ±ÉB

+Ê¦É¶ÉÉ{É CªÉÉå ¤ÉxÉ VÉÉªÉ ?

´ªÉÊHòMÉiÉ ¨Éä®úÒ ºÉ¨ÉºªÉÉªÉå

CªÉÉå BäÊiÉ½þÉÊºÉEò EòÉ®úhÉÉå EòÉä VÉx¨É nåù ?”13

®úÉ¨É Eäò ÊuùvÉÉOÉºiÉ ¨ÉxÉ ºÉä {ÉÊ®úiÉÉ{É +Éè®ú {É¶SÉÉiÉÉ{É EòÒ v´ÉÊxÉ ªÉÉå ÊxÉEò±ÉxÉä {É®ú ½þ É +SÉ®úVÉ ¨Éå {Éb÷ VÉÉªÉåMÉä

ÊEò EòÊ´É EòÒ Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ EòÉ´ªÉ oùÎ¹]õ EòÒ ¶ÉÊHò ÊEòiÉxÉÒ ¨ÉÊ½þ ÉÉ¨ÉªÉÒ ½èþ ?


‘ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ BEò ®úÉiÉ’ ¨Éå Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ ªÉÉäVÉxÉÉ Eäò uùÉ®úÉ {ÉÉè®úÉÊhÉEò ®úÉ¨É EòlÉÉ ¨Éå +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ¤ÉÉävÉ

+Éè®ú ªÉÖMÉÒxÉ ¦ÉÉ´ÉvÉÉ®úÉ EòÒ +Ê¦É´ªÉÆVÉxÉÉ Eò®úEäò EòÊ´É xÉä BEò SÉ¨ÉiEòÉ®ú ÊnùJÉÉªÉÉ ½èþ * +xiÉ ¨Éå ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ ÊxÉ´ÉÞkÉ

½þÉäEò®ú ®úÉ¨É ÊxÉhÉÇªÉ ±ÉäxÉä EòÒ, ÎºlÉÊiÉ iÉEò {É½ÚÄþSÉ VÉÉiÉä ½éþ iÉÉä EòÊ´É EòÉ¡òÒ ºÉ¡ò±É ½þÉä VÉÉiÉä ½éþ * xÉ®äú¶É VÉÒ

EòÒ EòÉ´ªÉ oùÎ¹]õ ºÉä ¡Úò]õiÉÒ ½Öþ<Ç +xÉxiÉ ¶ÉÊHò ¨Éå VÉxÉ ¨ÉÆMÉ±É EòÒ ¦ÉÉ´ÉxÉÉ ½þÒ ºÉ´ÉÇ|É¨ÉÖJÉ ½èþ * |ÉºiÉÖiÉ ®úSÉxÉÉ

Eäò WÉÊ®úB =x½þÉåxÉä Eò¯ûhÉÉ, {É®úÉä{ÉEòÉ®ú, +Éi¨ÉiªÉÉMÉ, ºÉiªÉ {É®ú +Êb÷MÉ Ê´É·ÉÉºÉ, +Énù¶ÉÇ EòÒ {ÉÊ®ú®úIÉÉ, ÊxÉ¨ÉÇ±É

|Éä É +ÉÊnù EäòÊ±ÉB =VV´É±É où¹]õÉxiÉ ªÉjÉ iÉjÉ |ÉºiÉÖiÉ ÊEòªÉÉ ½èþ * <ºÉ¨Éå ®úÉ¨É Eäò ºÉ¨¨ÉÖJÉ xªÉÉªÉ +Éè®ú

+ÊvÉEòÉ®ú |ÉÉÎ{iÉ EäòÊ±ÉB ªÉÖrù Eäò +±ÉÉ´ÉÉ +Éè®ú EòÉä<Ç ¨ÉÉMÉÇ ¶Éä¹É xÉ½þÓ ®ú½þ MÉªÉÉ iÉÉä ¦ÉÒ ´Éä +{ÉxÉä EòÉ´ªÉ Eäò

|ÉÊiÉ Ê´ÉSÉÉ®ú ÉÉxÉ ½éþ -

“ ¨Éé ¦ÉÒ ªÉÖrù EòÒ +ÉÊxÉ´ÉÉªÉÇiÉÉ EòÉä ¨ÉÉxÉiÉÉ ½ÚÄþ

ÊEòxiÉÖ

+{ÉxÉä ®úÉ¹]Åõ Eäò |ÉÊiÉ

CªÉÉ ªÉ½þÒ EòiÉÇ ªÉ ½èþ ¨Éä®úÉ

=ºÉ {É®ú ½þÉä ®ú½äþ

<ºÉ +ÉGò¨ÉhÉ ¨Éå ºÉÉlÉ nÚÄù ?” 14

ªÉ½þÉÄ xÉ®äú¶É VÉÒ EòÒ oùÎ¹]õ |ÉVÉÉ{ÉÉ±ÉEòÉå EòÉä =ºÉÒ +Éä®ú SÉäiÉÉ´ÉxÉÒ näùxÉä EäòÊ±ÉB ¨ÉÖb÷iÉÒ ½èþ ÊEò ÊEòºÉÒ

¦ÉÒ ÊxÉhÉÇªÉ ±ÉäxÉä Eäò {É½þ±Éä nÚùºÉ®úÒ ¤ÉÉ®ú ºÉÉäSÉxÉÉ +Éè®ú ºÉÉ¨ÉÉÊVÉEò nùÉÊªÉi´É Eäò |ÉÊiÉ vªÉÉxÉ®úiÉ ®ú½þxÉÉ +{ÉxÉÉ

EòiÉÇ ªÉ ½èþ * xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ EòÒ ±ÉÉäEò¨ÉÆMÉ±É-EòÉ¨ÉxÉÉ¨ÉªÉÒ EòÉ´ªÉoùÎ¹]õ EòÉ xÉÚiÉxÉ |ÉºÉÉ®úhÉ ‘ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ BEò ®úÉiÉ’

EòÒ ¨É½þi´É{ÉÚhÉÇ ={É±ÉÎ¤PÉ ½èþ *

+É¨ÉVÉxÉiÉÉ Eäò nÖùJÉ +Éè®ú ºÉÆPÉ¹ÉÇ EòÉ |ÉÊiÉÊxÉÊvÉi´É Eò®úxÉä ÉÉ±ÉÉ ½þxÉÖ ÉÉxÉ, +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ªÉÖMÉ Eäò

ÊxÉ®úlÉÇEòiÉÉ ¤ÉÉävÉ ºÉä {ÉÒÊb÷iÉ Ê´É¦ÉÒ¹ÉhÉ, +xÉÖVÉ ½þÉäiÉä ½ÖþB ¦ÉÒ uùxuùOÉºiÉ ®úÉ¨É EòÉä ªÉÖrùÉäx¨ÉÖJÉ ¤ÉxÉÉxÉä Éå |ÉªÉixÉ®úiÉ

±ÉI¨ÉhÉ +ÉÊnù EòÉä Ê¨ÉlÉEò Eäò ºÉ½þÉ®äú EòÊ´É xÉä ÊVÉiÉxÉÒ EÖò¶É±ÉiÉÉ ºÉä +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò ¦ÉÉ´É ¤ÉÉävÉ ¦É®ú ÊnùªÉÉ ½èþ, ´É½þ

EòÊ´É EòÒ Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ EòÉ´ªÉ oùÎ¹]õ EòÉ º{É¹]õ +Éè®ú ºÉÖxnù®ú |É¨ÉÉhÉ ½èþ * {É®Æú{É®úÉMÉiÉ ®úÉ¨É EòlÉÉ Eäò {ÉÉjÉÉå EòÉä,

´É½þÉÄ ºÉä EÖòUô nÚù®ú ±ÉÉEò®ú JÉb÷É Eò®ú ÊnùªÉÉ ½èþ iÉÉä ¦ÉÒ ½þ ÉÉ®äú ¨ÉxÉ EòlÉÉ EòÒ ºÉSSÉÉ<Ç {É®ú ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉOÉºiÉ ½þÉäEò®ú

Ê´ÉSÉÊ±ÉiÉ xÉ½þÓ ½þÉäiÉä * nù®ú+ºÉ±É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ VÉÒ EòÒ EòÉ´ªÉ oùÎ¹]õ EòÒ JÉÚÊ¤ÉªÉÉÄ ½þÒ <ºÉEòÉ EòÉ®úhÉ ½èþ *


b÷Éì. ¨É½þÉ´ÉÒ®úËºÉ½þ SÉÉè½þÉxÉ EòÉ EòlÉxÉ ªÉ½þÉÄ vªÉÉiÉ´ªÉ ½èþ - “ ‘ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ BEò ®úÉiÉ’ ¨Éå ÊuùvÉÉ +Éè®ú +ÊxÉhÉÇªÉ

EòÒ ¨ÉxÉÎºlÉÊiÉ ¨Éå bÚ÷¤Éä, ºÉ¨ÉªÉ EòÒ vÉÉ®úÉ Eäò ºÉ¨ÉIÉ +{ÉxÉä +É{É EòÉä Ê´É´É¶É +Éè®ú +ºÉ¨ÉlÉÇ {ÉÉxÉä ÉÉ±Éä ®úÉ¨É +{ÉxÉä

{É®Æú{ÉÊ®úiÉ °ü{É ºÉä ¤É½ÖþiÉ EÖòUô Ê¦ÉzÉ ½þÉäxÉä Eäò ¤ÉÉ´ÉVÉÚnù ªÉÊnù ½þ Éå +Ê´É·ÉºÉxÉÒªÉ xÉ½þÓ ÊnùJÉÉªÉÒ näùiÉä iÉÉä

<ºÉEòÉ ¨ÉÖJªÉ EòÉ®úhÉ ªÉ½þÒ ½èþ ÊEò ªÉ½þÉÄ ¦ÉÒ ®úÉ¨É EòÒ ¤ÉäSÉèxÉÒ EòÉ |É¨ÉÖJÉ EòÉ®úhÉ =xÉEòÉ +Énù¶ÉÇ ÉÉnùÒ

ÊSÉxiÉxÉ ½èþ *” 15

Ê¨ÉlÉEò Eäò +xnù®ú +ºÉÆ¦É´É ªÉÉ +SÉ®úVÉ EòÒ |ÉiÉÒÊiÉ ½þÉäxÉ´ÉÉ±ÉÒ PÉ]õxÉÉªÉå ½þÉäiÉÒ ½éþ * +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò

´ÉèYÉÉÊxÉEò oùÎ¹]õ ºÉä <ºÉEòÉ ¨ÉÆlÉxÉ Eò®úEäò EòÉ´ªÉ ¨Éå Ê¨ÉlÉEò EòÒ +´ÉvÉÉ®úhÉÉ EòÉä ={ÉäIÉhÉÒªÉ ¨ÉÉxÉxÉä ÉÉ±Éä

iÉÉÌEòEò ½þÉäiÉä ½éþ * ±ÉäÊEòxÉ <ºÉEòÉ ºÉ`ööÒEò =kÉ®ú Eäò °ü{É ¨Éå Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ EòÉ´ªÉÉå EòÒ ºÉÞÎ¹]õ, ´ÉÉEò<Ç =xÉ

»É¹]õÉ+Éå EòÒ EòÉ´ªÉ oùÎ¹]õ Eäò SÉ¨ÉiEòÉ®ú Eäò Ê¤ÉxÉÉ +Éè®ú EÖòUô ¦ÉÒ xÉ½þÓ ½èþ * |ÉÉSÉÒxÉ ´ÉÉiÉÉ´É®úhÉ +Éè®ú +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEò

´ÉÉiÉÉ´É®úhÉ ¨Éå ÊxÉÊ½þiÉ ¤Énù±ÉÉ´É EòÉä {ÉÚhÉÇiÉ: ºÉ¨ÉZÉEò®ú, +ÉvÉÖÊxÉEòiÉÉ EòÉä |ÉSÉÒxÉiÉÉ ºÉä |É¦ÉÉÊ´ÉiÉ Eò®úEäò

ºÉVÉÇxÉÉi¨ÉEò ¤Énù±ÉÉ´É näùxÉÉ EòÊ´É EòÒ ºÉIÉ¨ÉiÉÉ ¨Éå ÊxÉÊ½þiÉ ¤ÉÉiÉ ½èþ * EòÉ´ªÉ ¨Éå Ê¨ÉlÉEòÒªÉ {ÉÊ®úEò±{ÉxÉÉ näùxÉÉ

+iªÉxiÉ nÚù¦É®ú EòÉ¨É xÉ ¨ÉÉxÉEò®ú ÊEòºÉÒ ¦ÉÒ ÊnùCEòiÉ Eäò Ê¤ÉxÉÉ ºÉ®ú±ÉiÉÉ ºÉä EòÉªÉÇ ÊxÉ¦ÉÉxÉÉ ¸Éä¹`ö EòÊ´ÉªÉÉå

EäòÊ±ÉB +{ÉxÉÉ EòÊ´ÉEò¨ÉÇ ½þÒ ½èþ * +{ÉxÉä EòÊ´É Eò¨ÉÇ EòÉä ºÉ¡ò±ÉiÉÉ ºÉä ÊxÉ¦ÉÉxÉä ¨Éå ºÉ¨ÉlÉÇ +xÉäEò EòÊ´É

+ÉvÉÖÊxÉEòEòÉ±É Eäò ¨É½þiÉÂ {ÉÖhªÉ Eäò tÉäiÉEò ½éþ * <xÉ¨Éå xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ EòÉ ºlÉÉxÉ ÊxÉÌ´É´ÉÉnù °ü{É ºÉä

ºÉ´ÉÉæ{ÉÊ®ú ½èþ *

ºÉÆnù¦ÉÇºÉÆEäòiÉ

1. b÷ÉÆ ºÉÆiÉÉä¹É EÖò¨ÉÉ®ú ÊiÉ´ÉÉ®úÒ-xÉªÉä EòÊ´É BEò +vªÉªÉxÉ {ÉÞ-11

2. b÷ÉÆ Eò¨É±ÉÉ |ÉºÉÉnù {ÉÉÆbä÷ªÉ-UôÉªÉÉ´ÉÉnùÉäkÉ®ú Ë½þnùÒ EòÉ´ªÉ EòÒ ºÉÉ¨ÉÉÊVÉEò +Éè®ú ºÉÉÆºEÞòÊiÉEò

{ÉÞ¹`ö ¦ÉÚÊ¨É {ÉÞ 13

3. ¸ÉÒ |É¨ÉÉänù ÊjÉ´ÉänùÒ - xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ BEò BEòÉÆiÉ Ê¶ÉJÉ®ú- {ÉÞ 36

4. b÷ÉÆ =nùªÉ´ÉÒ®ú¶É¨ÉÉÇ =´ÉÒ¶É - +É¹ÉÇEòÊ´É xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ- {ÉÞ-73

5. ¸ÉÒ xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ - ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ BEò ®úÉiÉ {ÉÞ-20

6. ´É½þÒ - {ÉÞ-23

7. ¸ÉÒ |É¦ÉÉEò®ú¶É¨ÉÉÇ - xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ EòÉ EòÉ´ªÉ -Ê´É¨É¶ÉÇ +Éè®ú ¨ÉÚ±ªÉÉÆEòxÉ {ÉÞ-25


8. ¸ÉÒ xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ - ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ BEò ®úÉiÉ -{ÉÞ-25

9. ´É½þÒ - {ÉÞ-71

10. ´É½þÒ - {ÉÞ-54

11. ´É½þÒ - {ÉÞ-69

12. ¸ÉÒ®úÉ¨É Eò¨É±É ®úÉªÉ - xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ EòÊ´ÉiÉÉ EòÒ >ðv´ÉÇªÉÉjÉÉ {ÉÞ -78

13. ¸ÉÒ xÉ®äú¶É ¨Éä½þiÉÉ - ºÉÆ¶ÉªÉ EòÒ BEò ®úÉiÉ {ÉÞ 19-20

14. ´É½þÒ - {ÉÞ 72

15. b÷ÉÆ ¨É½þÉ´ÉÒ®úËºÉ½þ SÉÉè½þÉxÉ - xÉªÉÒ EòÊ´ÉiÉÉ EòÒ |É¤ÉxvÉ SÉäiÉxÉÉ {ÉÞ-72


ABSTRACT

Electrical properties of metal and semiconductors have been studied.

Current-voltage characteristic shows Ohmic behavior for metal and non-

Ohmic behavior for semiconductor at high fields. Temperature

dependence of electrical conductivity is linear for metal and activated

behavior for semiconductor.

EXPERIMENTAL

Constant current source,

temperature controller, digital

thermometer are designed and

constructed to study the

electrical properties of the

materials. Constant current

source supplying current from

0-30 mA is designed and

constructed to measure low

resistance sample. Figure 1

shows circuit diagram of

constant current source. Current

is set by the potentiometer. Difference in the input is amplified by

differential amplifier µA 741 which drives the emitter follower. Voltage

across the 1 Ù resistor provides current feed back. Buffer amplifier

amplifies the voltage across the current resistor whose output goes to

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY IN SOLIDS

K. M. REMYA and T. RAVINDRAN

Department of Physics


differential amplifier. Gain of the amplifier determines the regulation.

Variation in load resistance changes the voltage drop across the current

resistor which is the input to the buffer amplifier. Output of the buffer

amplifier is given to the differential amplifier whose difference is amplified

and maintains constant current across the load. Current changes by less

than 0.1 % when load changes from 10 MÙ to 1 Ù.

Temperature controllers are mainly classified into ON-OFF

proportional and proportional-integral-differential (PID) controller

according to different ways of power input to heater. The simplest controller

is ON-OFF. Voltage given to the heater is constant until temperature of the

bath is equal to the set temperature. When the temperature exceeds the

set temperature, voltage goes

to zero. In a proportional

controller, output to heater is

proportional to the difference in

system temperature and set

temperature. Output to heater

is proportional to the error

signal. In PID controller, voltage

proportional to the integral of

the error signal is supplied to the

heater.

Temperature controller

designed and constructed is a

proportional controller. Circuit

diagram is shown in figure 2.

Pulse width of the square wave

signal generated by the IC 555

timer can be varied by

adjusting the potentiometer.


Output is high during the

time interval T1 = 0.693

(R1+R2)C and output is

low during the time

interval T2=0.693R1C.

Signal drives the

Darlington pair which

consists of transistors SL

100 and 2N 3055. Resistance of the Nichrome heater coil is 4 Ù. Power

delivered by the controller is 20 W.

Sensors commonly used are platinum resistance thermometer,

thermocouple, diode sensors and thermistors. Figure 3 shows the circuit

diagram of a digital thermometer. Copper-constantan thermocouple is

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0 1 2 3 4 5

Voltage (Volts)

Cu

rre

nt

(mA

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8

Voltage (Volts)

Cu

rre

nt

(mA

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

9.75 9.8 9.85 9.9 9.95Voltage (Volts)

Cu

rre

nt

(mA

)

Figure 5. Current-voltage

characteristic of InAs and copper

Figure 6. Current-voltage characteristicof n-channel silicon

Figure 7. Current-voltage characteristic

of forward biased p-n junction.

Figure 8. Current-voltage characteristic

of reverse biased p-n junction.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Voltage (m V)

Cu

rre

nt

(mA

)

InAs

Copper


used to measure temperature from 0 0C to 200 0C. Thermo e-m-f is almost

linear in this temperature range. Thermo e-m-f is about 35 µV/0C at

room temperature. Thermo e-m-f generated is amplified by differential

dc amplifier. The amplified signal is given to ICL 7106 analog to digital

converter which drives seven segment display. Accuracy of 0.1 0C is

obtained.

The Experimental setup for temperature dependence of electrical

conductivity is shown in figure 4. Temperature dependence of resistance

is measured by passing constant current through the sample and voltage

developed across the sample is measured.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Current-voltage characteristics of copper, InAs, n-type silicon and

forward and reverse biased p-n junctions are shown in figures 5, 6, 7 and

8. Current-voltage characteristics show Ohmic behavior for copper and

non-Ohmic behavior for

compound semiconductor InAs at

high fields, n-channel silicon (FET

BFW10), forward and reverse

biased p-n junctions (emitter base

junction of transistor BEL 100N).

Figures 9 and 10 show

temperature (T) dependence of

electrical resistivity of copper, n-

channel silicon, forward and

reverse biased p-n junctions and InAs. Resistance increases with increase

in temperature for copper and heavily doped n-type silicon. Forward,

reverse biased p-n junctions and compound semiconductor show

decrease in resistance with increase in temperature.


Materials are classified

according to electrical

properties as metal,

semiconductor and insulator.

Band structure of a metal

consists of a partially filled

band. Electrons acquire

additional energy from field

and move to higher energy

states. Partially filled band is

called conduction band. Overlapping of valance and conduction band

also leads to metal. Resistivity of a metal (~10-6 Ùcm) is ñ = ñ 0 + ñ

1(T) , ñ

0 is

the residual resistivity at absolute zero and ñ1(T) is temperature dependent

arising from scattering of conduction electron by lattice vibration. In a

semiconductor valance band is completely filled and conduction band is

empty. Resistivity is in the range of 10-2 to 103 Ùcm at room temperature

and is strongly temperature dependent. Energy gap of semiconductor is

relatively small from 1 eV to 4 eV. Thermally excited electrons (~25 meV)

from the valance band to the conduction band acquire additional energy

from field and move through the crystal. Zener tunneling occurs for large

fields. Current is carried by electrons and holes. Insulators have resistivity

above 1014 Ùcm. Energy gap for insulator is large (~6 eV).

Electrical resistance of a material arises from scattering of electrons

from lattice vibrations, impurities and defects. In a pure crystal, conductivity

is infinite because Bloch electrons in a periodic lattice will not get scattered.

Current-voltage characteristic shows Ohmic behavior for metal for a large

range of electric fields. Nonlinearity is observed at low fields in

semiconductors and diodes. Non-Ohmic conduction [1] arises from

variation of mobility with field, space charge limited currents [2], Poole-

Frenkel effects [3] and Schottky emission [4] from electrodes in

0.25

0.35

0.45

0.55

0.65

0.75

0.85

0.95

1.05

25 45 65 85 105

No

rmalize

d resis

tivi

ty

Temperature (0C)

Figure 10. Temperature dependence of normalized electrical resistivity of reverse bias, forward bias p-n junctions (emitter-base junction of transistor BEL 100N) and InAs.

Reverse bias

Forward bias

InAs


semiconductors. Nonlinearity in diode is due to the potential barrier

created at the junction.

Material properties are modified by adding impurities to the pure

crystals. Donor or accepter

impurities are added to the pure

silicon or germanium crystals to

manufacture diodes and transistors.

Donor and acceptor impurities

occupy lattice sites and overlap

their wave function to form

impurity levels near to the valance

or conduction band (0.1 eV) (figure 11). Electrons in an impurity atoms

move around in hydrogen like orbitals. At room temperature most of the

electrons in the donor levels are

thermally excited to the conduction

band. Hence conductivity is mainly

determined by impurity electrons.

Figure 12 shows enegy level

diagram for metal-metal contact,

metal-semiconductor contact and

p-n junction. In a semiconducting

device metal-semiconductor

contacts are manufactured such that

the contacts are nonrectifying.

Contact potential is constant

independent of the direction and

magnitude of current. Such

contacts are called Ohmic. Applied

voltage changes the potential

barrier across the p-n junction. In a


metal-semiconductor contact electrons flow from metal to semiconductor

in such a way that Fermi levels match . A potential barrier is formed in the

semiconductor junction called Schottky barrier.

A p-n junction is formed in a single crystal semiconductor by adding

donor impurities into one side and acceptor impurities into other side. The

junction acts as a rectifier. Metal contact to the diode is Ohmic. Applied

potential (V) changes the potential barrier across the junction. In the

forward bias, electric current (I) is due to electrons and holes.

I=Isexp(eV/kT-1), where I

s is the sum of generation currents. In the reverse

bias, recombination current is Inr

=Inr0

exp(-eV/kT) where Inro

is the

recombination current due to electrons in thermal equilibrium. The

temperature dependence of electrical conductivity (ó) of metal is linear.

Temperature dependence of semiconductor is ó=ó0exp(-E

g/2kT) , where

Eg

is the energy gap. The dependence of reverse saturation current on

temperature in a p-n diode (silicon) is I0 =KT1.5exp(-E

g/2kT) where K is a

constant.

When applied field is small drain current increases linearly with

voltage in n-channel silicon. Increasing the field, current varies nonlinearly,

attains constant current region and then avalanche break down occurs. In

the constant current region channel is pinched off. Temperature

dependence of electrical resistivity shows increase in resistance with

increase in temperature. In a heavily doped semiconductor resistance

increases with temperature because of decrease in carrier mobility with

temperature.

CONCLUSION

Electrical properties of metal, compound semiconductor, doped

semiconductor and diode are studied. Current voltage characteristic shows

Ohmic behavior for metal. The behavior is non-Ohmic for semiconductor

at high fields, doped semiconductor and diodes. Positive temperature


coefficient of resistance is observed for metal and heavily doped

semiconductor. Forward bias p-n junction, reverse bias p-n junction and

compound semiconductor InAs show negative temperature coefficient of

resistance.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Authors are grateful to P. Dharmanandan for technical assistance

and NAAC for the support and cooperation for the research activity.

REFERENCE

1. T. Ravindran and S. V. Subramanyam 1991 Bull. Mater. Sci. 14

1205.

2. A. Rose 1955 Phys. Rev. 97 1538.

3. C. J. Adkins, S.M.Freake and E. M. Hamilton 1970 Philos. Mag. 22

183.

4. P.R. Emtage and W. Tantraporn 1962 Phys. Rev. Lett. 8 267.


Atmospheric aerosols play important roles in climate and atmospheric

chemistry: They scatter sunlight, provide condensation nuclei for cloud

droplets, and participate in heterogeneous chemical reactions. Two

important aerosol species, sulphate and carbon particles have large natural

sources that depend in a highly complex fashion on environmental and

ecological parameters and therefore are prone to influence by global

change. Reactions in and on sea-salt aerosol particles may have a strong

influence on oxidation processes in the marine boundary layer through

the production of halogen radicals, and reactions on mineral aerosols may

significantly affect the cycles of nitrogen, sulfur, and atmospheric oxidants.

Atmospheric aerosols are particles of solid and liquid phase

dispersed in the atmosphere. These particles are mainly sand dust from

the desert, suspensions result from volcanic eruption, carbon and soot

generated from industries and vehicles and sea salt precipitated during

evaporation. Subsequently, these particles or aerosols are well confined

in the atmosphere over a height of 3 km from the earth’s surface. As a

result, these fine particles interrupt the solar radiation received on the

surface of the earth to a larger extent, which in turn affect the solar energy

reaching on earth’s surface. The scattering of sunlight by aerosol can reduce

the solar flux, which results in the cooling of the surface of this planet. But

some of the aerosols have their chemical property to enhance the

greenhouse effect which warms earth and its atmosphere. These sporadic

changes in the atmosphere can induce substantial variation in the global

THE POTENTIAL ROLE OF AEROSOLS IN RETRIEVING

THE DYNAMICS OF ATMOSPHERE

K.M.PRASEED, K.RATHNAKARAN, SHEELA M JOSEPH AND

M.K.SATHEESH KUMAR

Department of Atmospheric Science , Kannur University


climate. Most aerosols are in the troposphere, but large volcanic eruptions

can inject aerosols and trace gases much higher into the stratosphere.

Aerosols in the stratosphere may remain for years while in the troposphere,

precipitation and interactions with Earth’s surface remove aerosols in ten

days or less. Aerosols are too small to be individually visible, but you can

often see their combined effect when the sky is hazy or looks dirty. Brilliant

orange skies at sunrise and sunset may also be indicators that aerosols are

present. Aerosols influence our weather and climate because they affect

the amount of sunlight reaching Earth’s surface. Volcanic aerosols in the

stratosphere have changed the surface air temperatures around the world

for years at a time. Biomass burning causes large local increases in aerosol

concentrations that can affect regional weather. Taken together with other

atmospheric measurements, aerosol measurements help scientists to

understand and predict climate and to comprehend atmospheric chemistry.

Aerosol concentrations vary significantly with location and time. There are

seasonal and diurnal variations as well as unpredictable changes due to

events such as large dust storms and volcanic eruptions. Aerosols are highly

mobile; they can cross oceans and mountain ranges. It is generally agreed

that, because of higher concentrations of aerosols, skies in many parts of

the world are hazier than they were one or two centuries ago, even in rural

areas.

Aerosol Optical Thickness (AOT, also called Aerosol Optical

Depth) is a measure of the extent to which aerosols affect the passage of

sunlight through the atmosphere. The larger the optical thickness at a

particular wavelength, the less light of that wavelength reaches Earth’s

surface. Measurements of aerosol optical thickness at more than one

wavelength can provide important information about the concentration,

size distribution, and variability of aerosols in the atmosphere. This

information is needed for climate studies, for comparison with satellite data

and to understand the global distribution and variability of aerosols.


Investigating Aerosols

Scientists have many questions regarding aerosols. How do aerosol

concentrations change with the seasons? How are aerosol concentrations

related to the weather and climate? How does smoke from large forest

affect sunlight reaching Earth’s surface? How long do volcanic emissions

stay in the atmosphere and where do they go? How is air pollution related

to aerosols? How do large industrial facilities and agricultural activities

affect aerosols? How do aerosols affect a satellite’s view of Earth’s surface?

Global measurements are needed to monitor the present distribution of

aerosols and to track events that alter aerosol concentrations. Their study

can lead to a better understanding of Earth’s climate and how it is changing.

Devices which measure the solar flux at these two discrete wavelengths

are known as a Sun Photometer which essentially contains a light filter,

detector and electronics to convert the solar intensity into voltages. The

conventional sun photometer has two channels, each of which is sensitive

to a particular wavelength of light green light at about 505 nanometers

(nm) and red light at about 625 nm. Green light is near the peak sensitivity

of the human eye; hence, a visibly hazy sky is likely to have a large aerosol

optical thickness at this wavelength. Red light is more sensitive to larger

aerosols. Data from a single channel enables the calculation of AOT in a

particular wavelength range but it does not provide information about the

size distribution of aerosols. Combining data from more than one channel

provides information on size distribution. Knowing the size distribution helps

identify the source of the aerosols.

Measurements taken with the sun photometer are in units of volts.

These values must be converted to aerosol optical thickness. There is a

Looking at the Data section for advanced a student that includes the

equation for converting sun photometer measurements into aerosol optical

thickness. A typical aerosol optical thickness value for visible light in clear


air is roughly 0.1. A very clear sky may have an AOT at green-light

wavelengths of 0.05 or less. Very hazy skies can have AOTs of 0.5 or

greater. It may be easier to understand the concept of optical thickness

when it is expressed in terms of the percentage of light that is transmitted

through the atmosphere, according to this formula:

Percent transmission = 100 x e-a

where a is optical thickness at a

particular wavelength. This

calculation gives the percentage of

light at a specific wavelength that

would be transmitted through the

atmosphere if the sun were directly

overhead. For example, an optical

thickness of 0.10 corresponds to the

percent transmission is about 90.5%.

Table 1 gives percent transmission as

a function of optical thickness.

Calculating Aerosol Optical

Thickness

The sun photometer output in

the form of a voltage can be calculated directly to the aerosol optical

thickness (AOT). This calculation is quite complicated but it is essential to

retrieve the abundance of aerosols present over a specific location. The

simplest equation for determining the AOT is:

Where:

ln is the natural (base e) logarithm Vo is the calibration constant

for your sun photometer. Each channel (red and green) has its own

Optical Percentage Thickness Transmission

0.10 90.5%

0.20 81.9%0.30 74.1%0.40 67.0%0.50 60.7%0.60 54.9%0.75 47.2%1.00 36.8%1.25 28.7%1.50 22.3%2.00 13.5%2.50 8.2%3.00 5.0%3.50 3.0%4.00 1.8%5.00 0.7%

AOT=[ln(V0/R2)-ln(V-V

dark)-a

R(p/p

0)m]

m


constant; R is the Earth-sun distance expressed in astronomical units (AU).

The average Earth-sun distance is 1 AU. This value varies over the course

of a year because the Earth’s orbit around the sun is not circular. An

approximate formula for R is:

(1- e 2)

[1+

e

cos(3600

·

d/365)]

where e is the eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit, approximately equal to

0.0167, and d is the day of the year. (Eccentricity is a measure of the amount

by which the Earth’s orbit differs from a circle.) Note that this equation

predicts that the minimum value for R occurs at the beginning of the year.

The actual minimum Earth-sun distance occurs, in fact, in early January. V

and V dark

are the sunlight and dark voltage from the sun photometer. It is

the contribution to optical thickness of molecular (Rayleigh) scattering of

light in the atmosphere. For the red channel is about 0.05793 and for the

green channel it is about 0.13813. P is the station pressure (the actual

barometric pressure) at the time of the measurement. Po is standard sea

level atmospheric pressure (1013.25 millibars), m is the relative air mass.

Its approximate value is:

m= 1/sin(solar elevation angle)

where solar elevation angle can be obtained from the Making a Sundial

Learning Activity or by using aclinometer. The calculation of AOT uses a

series of equations to more accurately calculate the Earth-sun distance.

For relative air mass, it uses those same astronomical equations to calculate

solar position from your longitude and latitude and the time at which you

took your measurement. Then it uses the calculated solar elevation angle

to calculate relative air mass, using an equation that takes into account the

curvature of Earth’s atmosphere and the refraction (bending) of light rays

as they pass through the atmosphere.

R =


Aerosols and Climate

Fig.2 The schematic diagram shows

the influence of aerosols in changing

the climate

Over the past decade, there

has been intense interest

concerning the role of aerosols in

climate and atmospheric chemistry.

The climatic effects of aerosols had

already been recognized in the early to mid-1970s, but the focus of scientific

attention shifted during the 1980s to the impact of the growing atmospheric

concentrations of CO2 and other “greenhouse” gases. Scientific interest in

the climatic role of aerosols was rekindled after the proposal of a link

between marine biogenic aerosols and global climate. The main sources

of biogenic aerosols are the emission of dimethyl sulfide (DMS) from the

oceans and of non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHCs) from terrestrial

vegetation, followed by their oxidation in the troposphere. Carbonyl sulfide

(COS), which has a variety of natural and anthropogenic sources, is an

important source for stratospheric sulphate aerosol and therefore indirectly

plays an important role in stratospheric ozone chemistry. These sources

are susceptible to changes in physical and chemical climate: The marine

production of DMS is dependent on plankton dynamics, which is influenced

by climate and oceanic circulation, and the photo production of COS is a

function of the intensity of ultraviolet-B (UV-B) radiation. Air-sea transfer

of DMS changes with wind speed and with the temperature difference

between ocean and atmosphere. The amount and composition of terpenes

and other biogenic hydrocarbons depend on climatic parameters, for

example, temperature and solar radiation, and would change radically as

a result of changes in the plant cover due to land use or climate change.

Finally, the production of aerosols from gaseous precursors depends on


the oxidants present in the atmosphere, and their removal is influenced by

cloud and precipitation dynamics.

Consequently, the fundamental oxidation chemistry of the

atmosphere is an important factor in the production of atmospheric aerosols.

In turn, aerosols may also play a significant role in atmospheric oxidation

processes. The oxidation efficiency of the atmosphere is primarily

determined by OH radicals (7, 8), which are formed through photo-

dissociation of ozone by solar UV radiation, producing electronically excited

O(1D) atoms by way of

where h

n

is a photone of wavelength

l

and by

Laboratory investigations have shown that reaction (1) can occur in a spin-

forbidden mode at wavelengths between 310 and 325 nm (9), and even

up to 410 nm. In the latter case, calculated O(1D) and OH formation at

low-sun conditions at mid-latitudes will increase by more than a factor of 5

compared with earlier estimates. Globally and diurnally averaged, the

tropospheric concentration of OH radicals is about 106 cm-3, corresponding

to a tropospheric mixing ratio of only about 4 x 10-14. Reaction with OH is

the major atmospheric sink for most trace gases, and therefore their

residence times and spatial distributions are largely determined by their

reactivity with OH and by its spatiotemporal distribution. Among these

gases, methane (CH4) reacts rather slowly with OH, resulting in an average

residence time of about 8 years and a relatively even tropospheric

distribution. The residence times of other hydrocarbons are shorter than,

as short as about an hour in the case of isoprene (C5H8) and the terpenes

(C10H16), and consequently, their distributions are highly variable in space

and time.

O3 + h

n

(

l

£

320 or 410 nm)

fi

O(1D) + O2 (1)

O(1D) +H2O

fi

2OH (2)


Black Carbon (BC)

Black carbon particles are one of the prominent aerosols found in

the atmosphere which can rapidly change the scattering and absorption

of solar flux. Thus this change can induce a significant variation in the

scattering albedo by which atmospheric dynamics will be varied from

time to time. Black carbon, brown carbon, and mineral dust are three of

the most important light absorbing aerosols. Their optical properties differ

greatly and are distinctive functions of the wavelength of light. Most optical

instruments that quantify light absorption, however, are unable to

distinguish one type of absorbing aerosol from another. It is thus ever,

instructive to separate total absorption from these different light

absorbers to gain a better understanding of the optical characteristics of

each aerosol type. While agreeing with the common consensus that BC is

the most 20 important light absorber in the mid-visible, it was

demonstrated that brown carbon and dust could also cause significant

absorption, especially at shorter wavelengths.

Aerosols scatter and absorb shortwave solar radiation, generally

resulting in cooling and warming of the planet, respectively, if the two

phenomena are treated independently. When globally averaged, the vast

amounts of highly scattering sulfate particles in the atmosphere (a product

of fossil-fuel combustion) are believed to have a net cool- cooling effect

on the earth’s surface. On the other hand, strongly absorbing soot carbon

aerosols lead to a warming of the planet. Other important light absorbing

aerosols in the atmosphere include brown carbon and mineral dust.

Aerosol absorption can be represented by the classic Beer-Lambert Law,

which relates the intensity of incident (I0) and outgoing (I) light by an

exponential:

I = I0e-lc


where l is the path length, and c is the concentration. The product of l and

c in the exponent is defined as the absorption coefficient (bap), which

can be measured by in-situ instruments such as the Aethelometer in units

of inverse length. If c represents the mass concentration of absorbing

particles (e.g. µg/m3), is then the mass absorption cross-section, or Mass

Absorption Efficiency (MAE), often in units of m2/g; MAE can vary greatly

depending on the type of light absorbers. Analogously, the scattering

coefficient (bsp) is the product of the scat- scattering cross section and

the concentration of scattering particles. Since all aerosols scatter light,

scattering coefficient is often used as a proxy for particle concentration.

The fraction of light extinction (sum of scattering and absorption) due to

scattering is defined as the single scatter albedo an intensive property

determined by the particle composition while independent of the total

aerosol concentration. The statistics of IPCC 2005 (Intergovernmental

Panel on Climatic Change) revealed the fact that India has the fourth

place in the release of black carbon in the world. It has been estimated

that BC could exert a positive radiative forcing of 0.2 Wm-2 and this in

turn would be sufficient enough to change the climate rapidly. The

complexities in exploring the atmosphere leading to the following aspects:

Radiative forcing

Radiative forcing is the change in the balance between solar

radiation entering the atmosphere and the Earth’s radiation going out.

On average, a positive radiative forcing tends to warm the surface of the

Earth while negative forcing tends to cool the surface. Radiative forcing

is measured in Watts per square meter, which is a measure of energy. For

example, an increase in radiative forcing of +1 Watt per square meter is

like shining one small holiday tree light bulb over every square meter of

the Earth.

Greenhouse gases have a positive radiative forcing because they

absorb and emit heat. Aerosols can have a positive or negative radiative


forcing, depending on how they absorb and emit heat and/or reflect light.

For example, black carbon aerosols - which have a positive forcing - more

effectively absorb and emit heat than sulfates, which have a negative

forcing and more effectively reflect light. The following are estimates of the

change in radiative forcing in the year 2005 relative to 1750 for different

components of the climate:

The radiative forcing contribution (since 1750) from increasing

concentrations of well-mixed greenhouse gases (including CO2, CH4,

N2O, CFCs, HCFCs, and fluorinated gases) is estimated to be +2.64 Watts

per square meter - over half due to increases in CO2 (+1.66 Watts per

square meter), strongly contributing to warming relative to other climate

components described below.

• The radiative forcing contribution from increasing tropospheric

ozone, an unevenly distributed greenhouse gas, is estimated to be

+0.35 Watts per square meter (on average), resulting in a relatively

small warming effect. This forcing varies from region to region

depending on the amount of ozone in the troposphere at a particular

location.

• The radiative forcing contribution from the observed depletion of

stratospheric ozone is estimated to be -0.05 Watts per square meter,

resulting in a relatively small cooling effect.

• While aerosols can have either positive or negative contributions

to radiative forcing, the net effect of all aerosols added to the

atmosphere has likely been negative. The best estimate of aerosols’

direct cooling effect is -0.5 Watts per square meter; the best estimate

for their indirect cooling effect (by increasing the reflectivity of

clouds) is -0.7 Watts per square meter, with an uncertainty range of

-1.8 to -0.3 Watts per square meter. Therefore, the net effect of


changes in aerosol radiative forcing has likely resulted in a small to

relatively large cooling effect.

• Land use change (including urbanization, deforestation,

reforestation, desertification, etc) can have significant effects on

radiative forcing (and the climate) at the local level by changing the

reflectivity of the land surface (or albedo). For example, because

farmland is more reflective than forests (which are strong absorbers

of heat), replacing forests with farmland would negatively contribute

to radiative forcing or have a cooling effect. Averaged over the Earth,

the net radiative forcing contribution of land use changes, while

uncertain, is estimated to be -0.2 Watts per square meter (IPCC,

2007), resulting in a relatively small cooling effect.

Based on a limited, 25-year record, the effect of changes in

the sun’s intensity on radiative forcing is estimated to be relatively

small, or a contribution of about +0.12 Watts per square meter. Thus

the atmospheric perturbation imparted by the aerosols, trace gases

and greenhouse gases play a vital role in determining the climate

change over a period of time. Owing to the industrial and

anthropogenic activities the concentrations of these species are found

to be increasing that makes the atmospheric dynamics more

complex. With this view, World Meteorological Organisation has

decided to conduct aggressive research all over the world to collect

information from all over the globe to validate the variations in the

weather and climate. Subsequently, the Indian counterpart, ISRO

has taken keen steps to establish Environmental Observatories all

over the country to provide data with high resolution and by which

we hope to map the dynamics of the atmosphere with more precision

in the days to come.


References:

1. Ackerman, A.S., et al., 2000a: Reduction of tropical cloudiness by

soot. Science, 288, 1042–1047.

2. Anderson, T.L., et al., 2003: Climate forcing by aerosols: a hazy

picture. Science, 300, 1103–1104.

3. Holben, B.N., et al., 2001: An emerging ground-based aerosol

climatology: aerosol optical depth from

AERONET. J. Geophys. Res., 106(D11), 12067–12097.

4. Ramachandran, S., V. Ramaswamy, G. L. Stenchikov, and

A. Robock, 2000: Radiative impact of the Mt. Pinatubo volcanic

eruption: Lower stratospheric response. J.

Geophys. Res., 105(D19), 24409–24429.

5. Ramanathan, V., P.J. Crutzen, J. T. Kiehl, and D. Rosenfeld,

2001a: Atmosphere: aerosols, climate, and the hydrological

cycle. Science, 294, 2119–2124.


The origin of Buddhism had been linked with the legend of the

transformation of Prince Siddhartha into the Sage of the whole mankind.

His philosophy contained the message of nonviolence and compassion

that embraced all beings, and it was based on a fine blend of metaphysics

and ethics that paved the way to man’s salvation not by negating life but

by understanding and imbibing the bona fide values of austerity and

sacrifice. Buddhism takes these values as essential for making this world

the home of all and for all, and the ‘all’ here is used in an all embracing

sense with reference to all living and non-living beings. This vision implies

an ecoethical perspective that is shared by other classical Indian systems,

yet at the same time unique in its own way.

In this paper, the focus of inquiry is the ecoethical dimension of

Buddhism as significant in our world of mounting ecological disasters and

crises. It is relevant here to see how the present day Seers in the Buddhist

tradition view and interpret the message of the guru in the context of our

fast changing life and world. With our emphasis on the ecoethical

dimension, we are concerned here more with the message of Buddha for

one and all than the methodological metaphysics in his philosophy. The

prescription for self-realization and self-transformation is vital to this way

of understanding Buddhism as put in this Doka of Zen Master Ikkyu,

“THE BUDDHA IS IN EVERYONE”

THE ECOETHICS OF BUDDHISM

M. RAMAKRISHNAN

Department of Philosophy

“It is easier to carry an empty cup

than one that is filled to the brim.”

Lao-Tzu


A monk asks Master Pai-Chang,

“Who is the Buddha?”

Pai-Chang answers,

“Who are you?” 1

This typical piece of Buddhist vision reveals, as we meditate upon

further and further, that in order to discover the truth of human nature the

first thing is to look into oneself as the mirror of all the world. Nothing

essentially distinguishes me/you from the rest of the world, and hence

nothing is there to make one superior to the other. So neither the individual

man nor the human species stands apart from or above other individual

human beings or other living species.

Spiritualism with a Difference

In the conventional histories of Indian philosophy, the rise of

Buddhism has been analyzed mainly in terms of the tension between the

orthodox Vedic schools and the heterodox anti-Vedic schools, and

accordingly Buddhism formed a vital component of the latter. Buddhism is

also analyzed as a prominent version of India’s ancient spiritualist tradition,

but certainly it is spiritualism with a difference because in place of the

Brahmancentric means to salvation prescribed by the Vedic schools,

Buddhism had emphasized a homocentric concept of liberation by realizing

man’s essential link with the whole cosmos.

According to Monier Williams, “The Buddha recognized no supreme

deity. The only God, he affirmed, is what man Himself can become. In

Brahmanism God becomes man, in Buddhism man becomes a God” (57).

Hence the radical nature of Buddhism in relation to the preceding systems

of thought can be analyzed from different angles with reference to different

norms. A recent study concludes that the Buddhist opposition to the yajña

tradition of ancient India was motivated by the intention to expose the

folly of the wasteful use of natural resources like firewood and ghee (Gadgil


and Guha 81). The authors attempt to reassert the ecological import of

Buddhism, both scriptural as well as socio-cultural with a view to delineate

its environmental ethics and ecological traditions.

Buddhism developed systematic and coherent doctrines based on

the concept of intrinsic interconnectedness in nature. This essential ethical

principle emerged out of a coherent synthesis between a well-defined

metaphysics, ontology and epistemology. So, Buddhism in its earliest and

most original form put forth its doctrinal framework in the Four Noble

Truths, the Noble Eightfold Path and Fivefold Principles called Panca-Œîla.

They embodied the Buddhist prescriptions to meditate upon and realize

the essential identity of man with nature.

Buddhism laid emphasis on mindfulness and meditation as essential

for the immediate perception of the nature of reality. The most fundamental

ideal of ecological significance is the theory of interdependent co-arising.

It explains the inherent cause-effect relation in natural phenomena and at

the same time relates the occurrences in human life to Kârmic causality.

Buddha placed mind in the center of man’s being in the world. The

Dhammapâda explains mind as preceding all things and producing all

things. Speech or act that emerges from a defiled mind is the source of all

suffering, and so from pure mind follows all well being like a “never-parting

shadow”.

The Metaphysics of Emptiness

The Buddhist explanations of reality in terms of interdependent co-

arising are the key to Nagarjuna’s ‘doctrine of emptiness’. The metaphysics

of emptiness is to be comprehended in its proper perspective as implying

the denial of any distinct independent self including that of the human being.

Everything in the world is dependently arisen and therefore everything is

empty in its essential being. This further entails the denial of any superior

independent status for human being. The notion of emptiness substantiates

Kârmic


the necessary interconnection and interdependence between all natural

phenomena. The true meaning of this concept is explained thus:

The theory of dependent origination and its corollary namely the

doctrine of nothingness in fact lead to the denial of an anthropocentric

sense of separate self, and in effect to the projection of a decentered self

in terms of a wider nature-based ontology. It does not instigate the sense

of insecurity and inferiority, but instead it widens the base of man’s self-

knowledge and self-manifestation as an integral part of nature. This is

nothing but the realization of one’s own Buddhahood in relation to the infinite

number of human and nonhuman Buddhas arising and existing in mutual

dependence in this world.

One in All and All in One

In this background, the Buddhist metaphysics is to be understood in

contrast with the Atman-centric ideology of the Brahminical tradition of

India. This becomes clearer as we look at the rich iconography and

mythology related to the different stages of the development of Buddhism.

The Jâtaka Stories of Buddha’s previous births present a wide variety of

animals, plants and other nonhuman beings. This proves the ecoaesthetic

You find that it is no longer necessary to uphold the fantasy

of a solid, lasting self; reality works perfectly well without one

and, in fact this self has only ever managed to get in the way and

cause trouble. The fear that denial of the self would give us no

ground to stand on is realized to be in itself groundless, like the

discovery we make as children when we find we can swim and

are, at that moment, freed from the terror of drowning. Thus the

instinctive insistence upon a separate self is seen to provide an

utterly false sense of security; for in undivided world everything

miraculously supports everything else. (Batchelor and Brown35)


inclination to conceive the essential non-distinction between human and

nonhuman beings.

In the early Buddhist texts, human beings were called upon to know

the grasses and trees, the worms and moths, the ants, and the four-footed

animals, the serpents, the fish and birds. The Avatamsaka Sûtra describes

the nature of earth as one without the thought of oneness or differences.

Nature’s body is composed of all lands and the Buddhas living in them. In

the words of Uisang, a Korean monk:

In one is all, in many is one

One is identical to all, many is identical to one.

In one particle of dust are contained the ten directions.

And so it is with all particles of dust.

It is known very well that the core of Buddhist ethics is formed by

the strict taboo on violence or ahimsa, and this is certainly an all-embracing

prescription. Ahimsa includes not only the abstention from doing harm

but also the positive moral expression in terms of loving-kindness and

compassion to all living beings. So the enlightened human being or Buddha

is the one who embodies the following ecological vision:

Thus as a mother with her life

Will guard here son, her only child,

Let him extend without bounds

His heart to every living being.(quoted in Batchelor and Brown 4)

As the mother’s love and concern for her child is unconditional

selflessness, man’s compassion towards nature should be unlimited. Human

empathy should embrace every living being and the lifeless also.


NOTE

1.Quoted in Osho. Zen and the Art of Meditation. New Delhi: Diamond

Pocket Books, 1997.

WORKS CITED

1. Batchelor, Martine, and Kerry Brown. Buddhism and Ecology. Delhi:

Motilal Banarsidass, 1994.

2. Gadgil, Mahav, and Ramachandra Guha. The Fissured Land- An

Ecological History of India. Delhi: Oxford U P, 1992.

3.Williams, Monier. Indian Wisdom. Delhi: Indian Reprint Publishing Co.,

1974.


Jean Paul Sartre was the foremost intellectual of the twentieth century

and a master thinker of freedom. He is often seen as a philosopher of a

world that has passed, a child and relic of modernity whose voice ramp out

amidst the alienation and horrors of the twentieth century. Now, it is not

detectable in the sound waves of our contemporary postmodern condition.

Sartrean existentialism was seen as the principal target for the (post)

structuralist revolution of the 1960s and 1970s. Levi Strauss, Foucault and

others criticized Sartre for relying on a humanist and idealist theory of the

subject. Sartre in tern criticized (post) structuralism for dissolving human

freedom by holding history hostage to the play of impersonal forces.

However, since Sartre’s death in 1980, interpretations of his work

have begun to probe the underbelly of this standard account. In recent

years, a fundamental reappraisal of Sartre’s work in its relation to post-

structuralism and in a wider sense to post modernism has been gradually

emerging. Sartre’s two main works of philosophy, Being and Nothingness

and Critique of Dialectical Reason, predate the main wave of (post)

structuralist texts in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. They can be seen in effect

to prefigure many key (post) structuralist themes such as the decentered

subject, the rejection of a metaphysics of presence, the critique of bourgeois

humanism and individualism etc.

In this paper, I am looking at Sartre’s approach to the ‘subject’, the

radically free consciousness of Being and Nothingness before considering

A REAPPRAISAL OF SARTRE’S ‘SUBJECT’ IN ITS

RELATION TO POSTMODERNISM

VIJAYAKUMARI VALAPPIL

Department of Philosophy


the deconstruction of the subject undertaken by (post) structuralists in the

1960s and 1970s. Then Sartre’s theory of the subject is compared with post

structuralist approaches to the subject put forward by Foucault and

examines the common features and similarities between the two. Sartre’s

idea of a contingent non-essential subject has much in common with the

decentered subject theorized by post – structuralists and post modernists.

The Cartesian subject founded on the certainty of the cogito is the

main reference point and critical target. From the basic starting point of an

indubitable thinking subject, Descartes proceeds to sketch a dualistic

philosophy that finds a binarist logic which lies at the heart of the antinomies

of modern western philosophy (subject/object, reason/ emotion, body/

soul, self/world, freedom/necessity) etc. All the French post-structuralists

criticized this binarist system of reasoning that emerges from the thinking

and disengaged Cartesian subject.

Sartean phenomenological and existential work, Transcendence of

the Ego (1936) to BN 1943) is commonly seen as a prime example of the

(modern) humanist tradition in French Philosophy which is attacked by the

post-structuralists in the 1963. They have put forward their own form of

theoretical anti-humanism as a corrective. Sartre’s theory of the ‘Pour-soi’

(for-itself) in BN has been interpreted in this light as an essentially Cartesian

construct deviated from the material, social, historical and linguistic

configuration. Sartre’s popular conception of absolute freedom in BN was

criticized by the poststructuralists arguing that he had reduced the impact

of circumstance and situation to no more than a function of individual

freedom. In BN, Sartre states, “What we call freedom is impossible to

distinguish from the being of ‘human reality. Man does not exist first in

order to be free subsequently; there is no difference between the being of

man and his being free. (30). He further says, “man cannot be sometimes a

slave and sometimes free, he is wholly and forever free or he is not free at

all” (516)


In BN, Sartre insists that all situations are equally transcendable by

the individual. However much they impact upon us, we are always free, by

dissolving their significance, to sidestep or ‘nihilate’ the force of this impact.

For Sartre, the weight of circumstances and objective conditions that

situations bring to bear on consciousness do not dissolve its freedom but

form the very basis of that freedom. Thus he says there can be a for-itself

only as engaged in a resisting world. Outside of this engagement, the notions

of freedom and determinism, of necessity, lose all meaning (621). According

to Sartre, it is only the constitutive power of the individual project which

causes there to be an organization of things in situation (509). He says,

whatever situation I am born or thrust into, this simply defines the particular

terrain in which I am free to determine the meaning of my life (245-6). He

tries to illustrate this is the prospect of being faced with a steep mountain

slop. The brute given of the mountain face (its slippiness, inaccessibility

the severity of its contours) constitute what Sartre calls the coefficient of

adversity” in things (482). We cannot change this, but he insists this forms

a precondition rather than a limit on freedom since freedom consist in

transcending the ‘given’. If I am an artist contemplating the aesthetic form

of the mountain instead of climber practically oriented towards it, my project

would screen its unscalability and effectively put this aspect ‘out of

circulation’ the crag is not revealed as scalable or unscalable, it is

manifested as beautiful or ugly (488).

The general term Sartre uses to describe the weight of our social

and material configuration is facticity. This involves our being thrown into

world that pre exists us and into a web of situations that are not all of our

choosing. In BN, he says facticity encroaches upon us only to the extent

that we integrate it into our personal project – I am always able to disengage

myself from the world where I had been engaged (39). The transient

surface aspects of me such as the language that I speak, the historical

situation of my race and culture, my gender, my childhood which I can

choose to exclude from my personal project and thus can withdraw from.


Even the existence of a rigid class structure in which one class is

systematically oppressed by the other has merely ‘significant value’ for

the individual class member (BN 421).

In BN, Sartre sets out to liberate intentionality from the confines of

the cogito and to release it into the world the concrete, that is, ‘man within

the world in that specific union of man with the world (3), In BN, Sartre

considers the force of circumstances and raise the possibility that the pour-

soi is not the impermeable sanction of freedom. Ascribing the case of the

factory workers, Sartre declares a state of affairs for them in which facticity

had encroached upon and effectively paralyzed their freedom to such a

degree that for the individual worker, to suffer and to be are one and the

same for him’. Again he puts the impermeability of the pour-soi into double,

when he considers the existence of others. He states that ‘to live in the

world is to be haunted by my fellow men and to find myself engaged in a

world in which instrumental complexes can have a meaning which my free

project has not first given them (509-10). The qualities others ascribe to us

can constitute a determinant factitious character.

In BN, the concept of the radical theory of subjectivity and bad faith

can be considered to keep a distance from a simplified Cartesianism. Many

years later, in an interview he confessed that I consider myself a Cartesian

philosopher, at least in BN. His idea of pour soi in many ways constituted a

radical break from traditional French Idealism and its abstract view of the

individual as a spiritual or immaterial essence divorced from concrete

determinations.

Sartre argues that the ‘I’ of selfhood cannot be a substantial entity

that sits behind my acts and thoughts unifying them. But it is itself, the result

of the synthetic unification of a pattern of actions, the ego is not the owner

of consciousness, it is the object of consciousness. Since the ‘I’ does not

correspond to any kind of inner sanction or to an original pre-given subject,

it must be created. According to Sartre, we do this either by describing


past acts under a certain description to which we impart the characteristics

of identity, of purity, of permanence or by reference to a particular non-

existing state of affairs, a future ‘I’ or ideal self or original project –

‘consciousness confronts its past and its future as facing a self which it is in

the mode of not being (34). In this way, ‘I’ can refer ambiguously to the

past (character) or to the future (ideal self) – it is a temporal construct, a

particular relation to being’ (BN 216) which is impermanent and fluid. It is

only when consciousness nihilates itself i.e., takes a thetic, positional

awareness of itself as an object, that the unity of the ‘I’ is constructed,

negation is the cement which realizes this unity. In Existentialism and

Humanism Sartre says that his philosophy in BN is a humanist philosophy

of action, of effort, of combat, of solidarity. He maintains that, it is a form of

agency without substantiality which has nothing to be, and everything to

do. Sartre makes it clear that self understanding arises not from private

introspection, the deciphering of a self that stands behind or prior to the

act (as in Cartesian model), but by observing how we are, reflected in the

world of tasks which constitutes the image of myself (200). In this way,

Sartre’s existential subject diverges from the Cartesian subject in that it is

constituted outwardly by its engagement and actions in the concrete world

rather than inwardly within the private sanction of the soul.

Sartre’s concept of Bad faith can be seen to represent in general a

movement away from a purely static and oppositional account of pour-

soi/en-soi to a more dialectical or conjunctive approach in which he views

human reality as both body and consciousness, materiality and

transcendence. Sartre argues that bad faith lies in the attempt to cancel

out completely one of these dimensions through a form of self deception

or lying to oneself. To think of ourselves as pure transcendence in the

Sartrean system is a prime act of Bad faith.

According to Ronald Aronson, it is possible to discern ‘two contrary

impulses in Sartre’s early philosophy “one leading towards the world and


the other away from it (1980, 89). In the latter impulse, the pour soi is seen

as absolutely free and able to escape its facticity at any time. Sartre breaks

away from this in other places and moves towards a more dialectical

understanding of subject and object in which the subject is engaged,

immersed and permeable to the world, both transcended and material.

The Post modern Subject

Postmodernists present the subject as fragmented, decentered and

multiple, dispersed throughout different subject positions or identities that

are constituted by modern mass consumer and media dominated societies.

In the postmodern world, identities are no longer maintained primarily in

one’s role as a producer, but in the consumer choices and ‘sign-values’ one

subscribes to. For both affirmative and sceptical postmodernist, the subject

is held to be inherently objectionable as an ideological construct of

modernity, the source of an unacceptable subject –object dictionary where

it assumes a dominating and oppressive role – ‘man as master of the

universe, dominating, controlling, deciding’ (Vattimo 1988). Foucault states,

this instrumental conception of the subject in which the individual is given

‘an exact and serene mastery of nature’ does not give rise to the constitution

and affirmation of a free subject but is tied instead to a progressive

enslavement to its our instinctive violence (1977b,163)

Sartre and the decentered subject:

Sartre’s existential subject has been commonly viewed as antithetical

to the decentering strategies of the poststructuralists. Schrifft argues that

Foucault was distancing himself from the phenomenalist existential

especially of Sartrean subject. By returning to a Nietzschean account of

the subject, Foucault replaces the Sartrean project of an authentic self with

the Nictzschean project of relatively constructing oneself. In so doing, he

displaces both the valorized, free, existential subject and retrieves a more


ambivalent subject whose constitution takes place within the constraints of

institutional forces that extend its grasp and even at times its recognition.

With regard to the Satrean and Foucaultian ‘subject’, the Sartrean

subject is not just a thinking, rationalizing consciousness which gives

meaning to things, but is also engaged- an actor immersed in the world of

things. Thus it incorporates both freedom and necessity transcendence and

facticity. Similarly, Foucalt’s conception of the subject is not always uniform

or consistent but oscillates between poles of unbearable lightness and

heaviness. In his archaeological phase, Foucault characterizes thought as

constrained by linguistic conditions to the extent that we cannot even render

an account of the limits a particular thought is constrained in. Later he

suggests that the practices of philosophy in reflection are themselves ways

to free our thoughts- thought is a freedom in reflection to what one does,

the motion by which one detaches oneself from it, establishes it as an object,

and reflects on it as a problem (1984, 388). Later, Foucault goes on to

reinstate philosophy as a privileged discourse, arguing that the role of the

philosopher is to make oneself permanently capable of detaching oneself

from oneself (while) altering one’s thought and that of the others (1988,263-

64). Foucault’s ‘ethical’ subject in this way,bears some similarity to the

Sartream subject.

The encumbered genealogical subject which Foucault describes in

Discipline and Punish also bears some similarity with Sartrean subject.

Foucault emphasises how power is co extensive with the social body (1980,

141) permeating all discourse and practice. His main interest in this respect

is to show how power plays upon the individual to produce specific effects

in this. Foucault sees the power relations of modern society produces a

subject who is the carrier of prevailing norms trained through requires of

insidious leniencies, petty cruelties, small acts of cunning, calculated

methods, techniques, “sciences” (1977 a ,308). In the place of the old

‘body politic’, modern society now revolves around a politics of the body


‘under which individuals’ are gradually progressively ,really and materially

constituted (1980,97).Once the body has been trained through techniques

of discipline and surveillance, Foucault is keen to emphasize that the subject

himself becomes the career of norms by which he measures himself.

Foucault illustrates that the power is not just exercised by the law of

repression, but operates by producing psychological and social conformity.

Individuals themselves are complicit in their own subjection- they are not

just empty skeins which pours itself into, but conscious, psychological beings

who interpret themselves according to the context and relations of power

within which they are situated. For Foucault, experiences of subjectivity

are self interpretations based on concrete interactions with the world. In

the modern carceral society these concrete interactions enmeshed in

networks of power that validate certain self interpretations and obstruct

others. A certain kind of subject is produced as it comes to know itself by

means of stable, identifiable points of reference conditioned through inter

subjective practice. Hoy points out that for Foucault, the network of power

relations is more like a ‘structural grammar’ than ‘causal process’ for it

conditions action but does not determine which specific actions will take

place (1986,142). We are the products of power in the sense that our self

interpretations are conditioned by it, it is through self interpretations that

we come to regard ourselves as originators of our own actions.

In common with post structuralist theories of the subject, Sartre takes

the ‘I’ to be no more than a synthetic construct of consciousness which is

impermanent and fluid. For Sartre, the intuition of the ego a perpetually

deceptive mirage (1957, 69). In Being and Nothingness , Sartre continues

this theme, where he argues at length against the idea of an authentic or

‘deep’ self which is pre-given or original, insisting that the Pour-soi is

fundamentally a relation (121) , a ‘perpetual differing’ (BN713) and

diasporique (182). This is reemphasized in The Family Idiot where Flaubert’s

self is theorized through out as an imaginary construct rather an original


source. In this respect. Sartre hints at the authentic self which is similar to

that of Foucault’s ethical self. Both of them revolve around the idea that the

self must be created through action and self interpretations rather than

discovered through introspection and withdrawal as in Cartesian model.

Like the post structuralist subject, Sartrean subject originates not

from a transcendental subject, instead from a non essential, non identical,

historical, decentered, impermanent and contingent. The Sartrean subject

is not the autonomous, self sufficient foundation as it has often being

portrayed, but is divided, non egoic and never self identical and as such,

can be seen to pre-figure ‘the decentered subject’ and the rejection of a

‘metaphysics of presence’ taken up in later years by post structuralist like

Foucault and Derrida.

The difference between Sartrean and Foucaultian subject is

produced in ontological-individual rather than in socio-linguistic terms. In

Sartre’s and Foucault’s conception of the gaze (BN &Discipline and Punish)

Where both thinkers ruminate on the subjectifying force of observation in

which the subject is thrown into an objective apprehension of itself. In BN,

working from ontological assumptions, Sartre chooses only negative

examples of the gaze (Voyeur at the keyhole whose overriding apprehension

of himself is dominated by shame) and draws individualist and universal

conclusions from it. For Sartre the gaze is essentially alienating and

conflictual – the observation of a nameless ‘unknown other’ who casts

objective judgement on me. Foucault’s account of the normalizing gaze in

Discipline and Punish avoids ontological conclusions, but relates the

significance of the gaze to its social and historical context. The prison guard

and the self conscious prisoner are positioned in a network of relations in

which they are not equal participants. A fundamental asymmetry flows

between them due to the arrangements of the social field in which they

find themselves- first, because observation is a one way process (due to

the architecture of the prison) and second, because the guard stands in a


relation of authority to the prisoner upon whom he passes punitive

judgement according to predefined norms. In this sense, the gaze is an

institutional gaze anchored in definitive power relations within a specific

social and historical milieu.

Sartre and Foucault theorized the gaze in different terms, but they

are agreed on its importance in the formation and constitution of the subject.

There is another difference that we can see between the Sartrean

project of an authentic self and the Foucaultian project of “creatively

constructing one self.” Post structuralists criticized Sartre’s Pour-soi as a

repetition of the Cartesian subject. This judgement ignored other emphases,

which placed his existential subject at a distance from the disengaged,

abstract and immaterial Cartesian subject. Later Foucault recognized this

and applauded Sartre for moving beyond the entrenched Cartesianism of

his time, for avoiding the idea of the self as something which is given to us.

(1983, 64). The notion of a nonessential contingent subject intrinsic to

Sartre’s existentialism is the one which unites his work with the post

structuralists.

Many of the themes that we have seen above were taken up,

extended, developed or modified by post structuralists. Certain aspects

of Sartre’s early work fixed themselves lightly, while Foucault focused on

the ‘heaviness’ of the subject. “In later years this situation would be reversed

with Sartre’s emphasis becoming much more deconstructive and that of

the post structuralists more reconstructive”. In this respect, Sartre and post

structuralist conception of the subject start out from different positions but

eventually converse, both resting upon a conception of the subject as

decentered, opaque material and historical. In this respect, Sartrean subject

can be recast as a spurious target for the deconstructive critiques of

Foucault and other post structuralists. Sartre’s existential epithet –


‘existence precedes essence’ captures the anti-essentialist emphasis of the

decentered post modern subject.

References:

1. Aronson, Ronald- Jean Paul Sartre-Philosophy in the world, London: New

Life books, 1980

2. Farrel fox, Nik-The New Sartre, Continuum, London, 2003

3. Foucault. M, The order of the things: An Archaeology of the Human

Sciences, trans. A. Sheridan-smith, New York: Pantheon 1970

4. Foucault. M, Language, Counter Memory, Practice:Selected Essays and

interviews ed. C. Gordan. Oxford, Blackwell, 1997b

5. Foucault. M, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, trans, A.

Sheridan, Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1977a

6. Foucault. M, ‘How We Behave with H. Dreyfus and P. Rainbow, Vanity Fair’

November, 1983

7. Foucault. M, The Foucault Reader, ed. P. Rabinon, New York: Pantheon,

1984

8. Foucault. M, Politics, Philosophy, Culture:Interviews and other writings,

trans. A. Sheridan Smith, New York: Routledge, 1988

9. Hoy D. Foucault: A Critical Reader, ed.D. Hoy, Oxford: Blackwell,1986

10 Sartre J. P., Being and Nothingness: An Essay in phenomenological

Ontology, trans. H. Barnes, London: Philosophical Library, 1957

11 Schrift A., Nietzsche’s French Legacy: A Genealogy of poststructuralism

London, Routledge, 1995

12. Vattimo G., The End of Modernity: Nihilism and Hermeneutics in Post-

Modern Culture, London: Polity press, 1988

chief editor - brennencollege.ac.inbrennencollege.ac.in/ml/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/brennrn... ·...

Documents