Why Not Be A Ganesha To Each Other

Meena Om





The clay Ganesha murtis that you bring home for Ganesh Chaturthi take several weeks to be crafted out of clay , moulded, dried, smoothened, painted, decorated ­ before you can pray to them asking to remove all hurdles to your life; but what about you? Are you not supposed to prepare yourself to invite divinity to visit you, bless you?
Cleaning your house and surroundings is one part of the preparation, what is equally , in fact, more important, is cleaning yourself from inside; removing traits which are undesirable for human growth such as jealousy , envy , fear and guilt. The Supreme has endowed each of us with a special individual trait which can be developed to contribute to the welfare of humanity but many of us don't know what their special individual trait is.Most people pray to Ganesha, also called `vighna harta' ­ destroyer of hurdles, to remove the blocks from their material life, their physical being, for their own betterment, for the welfare of their children. All this is at a very gross level, whereas Ganesha-energy can do a lot more. It is meant to be ignited when you are about to start a new project. To keep yourself alive you need to have some passion.So, what new passion are you planning to pursue, what new project are you taking up for which you are inviting Ganesha to vibrate your home?
Introspect on this.
And if you are seeking Ganesha's blessings to start something new, is this new project meant for all or for your own selfish motive? There should be clarity. Ganesha is to be ignited to let blossom all your strength, your inner qualities and directing them towards a holistic and beautiful creation, which is for humanity as a whole; or to silently contribute to universal life force for showering wisdom, peace, bliss and right direction to all.
The community ritual of setting up a pandal and worshipping a Ganesha murti together with everyone for 10 days and then immersing it in water ­ has now developed into something very personal. People get their personal Ganeshas home, seeking personal benefits, and this has spread everywhere. Otherwise, there used to be a few Ganesha puja pandals in different parts of the city where everyone would go and worship ­ this would incul cate in them a community feel ing, of service, sense of discipline, teach them the idea of beautiful coexistence.
But times have changed.
Surely you can keep a Ganesha murti at home if you like; in fact, you could keep anything symbolic of Ganesha at home, anything which reminds you of him. It could be a pebble or even a plant, instead of buying murtis which when immersed only litter banks and beaches, lying there like garbage, half broken and discoloured.
All deities are symbolic and it is important to know that they are reminders of certain virtues to be imbibed.
Be a Ganesha to each other.
To mark the festival visit the homes of friends and relatives you have not met in years or acquaintances you have ignored and give them some happiness, give them some new zest in life, help them set up some new venture that will add some happiness to their lives. Be a Ganesha to each other rather than indulging in rituals or showing off your opulence and how well you are taking care of the Ganesha you have installed in your home.

The Sociologist of Informal Labour: Sharit Bhowmik, 1948-2016

By eSocialSciences | Published: September 9, 2016

---

Sharit Kumar Bhowmik

Sharit Kumar Bhowmik, sociologist well known for his studies in labor and especially on the informal sector, passed away September 8 in Bangkok. He was in a coma for some time, having collapsed as complication of undiagnosed pneumonia in his hotel room. His wife and partner, Meenakshi, and his family were with him.

Bhowmik received his MA from Mumbai University and earned his doctorate from the Delhi University. His early work was on plantation labor in West Bengal. Subsequently he consolidated his work in the area of labor studies focusing on informal labor and labor rights.

Ever an activist, Sharit’s scholarly positions on labor issues never wavered. He interacted closely with workers’ leaders and was never an ‘outsider’ in its sociological sense, to workers organizations, their core issues and the movement. He wrote extensively on workers’ cooperatives and workers’ organizations. While a supporter of the working class causes, he was also sharply critical of the functioning of trade unions, especially in recent times.

His career spanned a number of universities and institutions: He retired from the School of Labour and Management Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai. Before that he was at the Department of Sociology, University of Mumbai; Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi; Indian Institute of Management Calcutta; University of North Bengal, Darjeeling District, West Bengal. Currently he was National Fellow with the Indian Council for Social Sciences.

His most important work, both in the scholarly world and as an activist, was his massive contribution to and leadership in the formalization of a policy on street vendors, which came about as a follow-through of his work on informal labor which began at a time when few labor scholars were focusing on this sector. Sharit wrote extensively, both in the academic press and in the media. For a time he co-edited with Professor Datta, the Labour Studies supplement of the Economic and Political Weekly. He had no hesitation in calling a spade a spade regardless of the fallout that it may prompt. Because of this, he was highly respected by his peers and labor leaders and activists, across the spectrum. Regardless of affiliations, he was always available to political, social and civil society activists.

Sharit was, more than anything else, a role model of a new generation sociologist who combined activism and scholarship seamlessly and effectively. He is mourned by his many students, whom he nurtured actively and sustainedly through their early careers; his colleagues and fellow workers who shared his space and vision, by the vast numbers of labor activists and workers whom he befriended and worked alongside. He will be sorely missed, especially in an environment that needs the broad-based, progressive vision, scholarship and activism of those like Sharit Bhowmik.

Competing for an equal world

A tiny step to impart a sense of dignity to the efforts of para-athletes is to recognise them as differently abled, not disabled.

The Second World War is perhaps the most devastatingly transformative event of the 20th century. Not just in the way it left millions dead, with physical capital destroyed and lands rendered barren, but also in the way it left those alive, including many young people, scarred and crippled for life.

Among them were many soldiers who sustained horrific injuries. There was a need — even a moral imperative — to ensure that those who were witness to such horrors and yet survived still be contributing members of the society.

Inclusion and empowerment

It is to this period that the roots of the modern-day Paralympics can be traced. One of the ways to achieve inclusion was devised by the neurosurgeon Ludwig Guttmann, who organised a small sports competition for 16 World War II veterans, who had injured their spinal cords, at Stoke Mandeville hospital in July 1948. The competition was run parallel to the Olympics in order to attract attention.

In 1964, the term ‘Paralympics’ was officially used, and at the 1988 Seoul Games, the organising committees, for the first time ever, saw to it that the Olympic and Paralympic athletes competed in the same venues and participated in similar opening and closing ceremonies. In 1989, the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) was formed and from 1992 (Barcelona) onwards, it has closely worked with the International Olympic Committee. Post 2008, in an attempt to place both on an equal pedestal, it was decided that all cities which bid to host the Olympics will also have to host the Paralympics.

Since the days of Guttmann, Paralympic sport has no doubt evolved. Back then it was a vehicle for rehabilitation. Today it is seen as a tool for emancipation and empowerment. Yet, for all the noble intentions, there is still a question mark over what the Paralympics means today. Does it exist to display what a “disabled” person can do or it is a spectacle of elite sport? Is the emphasis on the disability or the sport?

“It’s both ways,” says Sharath M. Gayakwad, an Indian Paralympic swimmer who won six medals at the 2014 Asian Para Games in Incheon. “They look at me as an achiever and sportsman. But otherwise it’s the deformity that’s looked at.”

“That’s why I feel education about para-sports is important,” he adds. “You need to spread awareness. In countries like Australia and the U.S. there is a separate education system. The other thing is to train the coaches. When I first sought coaching for competitive swimming, the coach didn’t know how to train me. He had to do a lot of research.”

Long road to legitimacy

This public perception of a para-athlete owes much to what is called the ‘Supercrip Model’. The description of him or her when successful is more often than not according to the common stereotypes of pity and heroism.

In The Paralympic Games: Empowerment or Side Show? by Keith Gilbert and Otto J. Schantz, an athlete is quoted as saying: “There is a popular perception that… people feel sorry for us because we’re always in a wheelchair and they figure that we can’t do much of anything anyway. Stories like this [of winning] refute that — that we can be just as creative and productive as anybody else. I mean, this guy is still working in sports!”

While it is true that the model, to a certain extent, highlights the rugged determination of an athlete, disability activists argue that this narrows expectations and stigmatises them. In the long run, it is undesirable for the athletes to see their stories depicted only under the bracket “human interest” and be packaged only in ways that are more acceptable to the “able-bodied” world.

“This issue will always be there,” says Gayakwad. “But after these medals in Rio that Mariyappan Thangavelu, Devendra Jhajharia, Deepa Malik and Varun Singh Bhati have won, it should change. In spite of being just a 19-member contingent, we have already won four medals. As a sporting achievement it is a very good.”

The trick might well be for Paralympics to secure in the eyes of the world a “separate but equal” status under the broad umbrella of the Olympic movement. However it is easier said than done. For long, Olympic sports have maintained that individuals with a deformity are not exactly excluded from qualifying for events in the Olympics. But what it does is to undermine the status of para-sports as a legitimate form of sport. For perspective, one can look at how long it took for able-bodied women to be considered “separate but equal”.

It may take a considerable amount of time for such an inclusive ideology to take root, but a tiny step through which one can impart a sense of dignity to the efforts of these athletes is by recognising them as “differently abled” and not “disabled”.

“It’s not that we can’t get things done,” says Gayakwad. “In spite of my deformed hand, I can do everything!”

sudarshan.narayanan@thehindu.co.in

Keywords: Paralympics, para-athletes, persons with disabilities

Source: The Hindu, 15-09-2016

Gaya betel shopowner’s son makes his mark in US submarine design contest

Four years back when Anshuman, son of a betel shopowner Sunil Kumar cracked IIT, the newspapers sketched his struggle - how he vaulted from a humble background to make it big.

Four years after the big news, Anshuman has again become talk of town.

Anshuman, now a final year BTech student of IIT-Mumbai, has bagged second position in the submarine design contest ‘Robo Sub’, organised recently at Santiago city of the United States. The competition was attended by representatives of 11 countries, including the USA, Canada, China, Japan and Russia.

Anshuman, who led a team of seven engineers, astonished the world with the latest prototype submarine design.

Anshuman and his team were given the task at the competition to assemble an automatic submarine that was to be left in an open oceanic atmosphere. The submarine prototype was then required to identify the colour and touch the balloons. Out of the 11 countries, IIT-Mumbai’s model named ‘Matasya’ stood second.Sunil Kumar, who barely knows the nitty gritty of his son Anshuman’s achievement, is elated seeing the brouhaha round his house. A low-profile man Sunil said, “Despite the fact that my financial condition is not so good, I have never turned deaf ears to the demands of my three sons and made them engineers. Anshuman is the second while his elder and youngest brothers are also engineers.”

He said, “When my son Anshuman informed me about his achievement in America, the entire Ganga Mahal, the residential society where we live, burst into joy and my wife organised a small puja.” He admitted that he did not know much about the achievement of his son. “My neighbours and relatives term it as a big thing,” he said.

Talking to Hindustan Times from Mumbai, Anshuman said, “I am very happy with our scores at ‘Robo Sub’. I dream to make my country self-reliant in technology. The type of automatic submarine designed by us at IIT would help Indian Navy in many ways. It can reach places where humans cannot tread. It can be used as a multi-purpose automatic submarine designed to compete with other war equipment under the water.”

Anshuman gave credit to his parents, brothers and school teachers for his achievement.

Anshuman did his schooling from Gaya. After matriculating from Gaya DAV and doing plus two from Creane Memorial School, he cracked JEE and got admission in IIT-Mumbai.

Source: Hindustan Times, 15-09-2016

Zurich is world’s most sustainable city, according to a new index

A new index, the 2016 Arcadis Sustainable Cities Index by international design and consultancy firm Arcadis, has ranked 100 global cities according to their social, environmental and economic health. The index has assigned to them overall as well as parameter-specific rankings. These three parameters are people, planet and profit.

In overall rankings, Zurich, Singapore, Stockholm, Vienna and London make the top five spots on the list. But when ranked according to performance on the people parameter, Zurich appears in 27th place, Singapore is placed 48th and London is at number 37. This parameter takes into account demographics, education, income inequality, work-life balance, crime, health and affordability.

The planet sub-index, which considers energy consumption, environmental risks, green spaces, air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, waste management and drinking water and sanitation, placed five European cities—Zurich, Stockholm, Geneva, Vienna and Frankfurt—in the top five positions.

The profit sub-index includes transport infrastructure, economic development, ease of doing business, tourism, connectivity and employment. Singapore, Hong Kong, London, Dubai and Zurich came in the top five under this parameter.

Indian cities were among the last 12 to appear on the overall index with Chennai ranking 89th, Bengaluru 91st, Mumbai 92nd, New Delhi 97th and Kolkata taking the last spot on the list.

The report recommends that cities must aim to create a sense of community by ensuring equality among different neighbourhoods. This means they must ensure that all people enjoy at least a basic standard of living, with access to dwelling, water, employment, education and health. The report also asks cities to improve people’s quality of life by increasing the number of green spaces. Increasing cities’ resilience to extreme weather events and unforeseen water shortages is another way of making cities sustainable.

“Getting a city to invest, develop, evolve and, ultimately, be a better host for its permanent residents, will propel it to become more sustainable and competitive,” writes John Batten, Global Director of Water and Cities at Arcadis, in the report.

The release of the index assumes importance in the context of Habitat III, an event by the United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development to be held in October in Ecuador. At the conference, countries will negotiate and possibly adopt the New Urban Agenda, an international roadmap for achieving sustainable urban development.

Source: Down to Earth, 13-09-2016

Union Government issues model guidelines for states to curb Ponzi schemes

The Union Government has issued model guidelines for states to regulate direct selling and multi-level marketing businesses to protect consumers from Ponzi frauds. These model guidelines titled the Direct Selling Guidelines 2016 framework was released by Union Food and Consumer Affairs Minister Ram Vilas Paswan in New Delhi. Key features of guidelines The direct selling has been clearly defined as marketing, distribution and sale of goods or providing of services as a part of network of direct selling. The legitimate direct selling is differentiated from pyramid and money circulation schemes in order to help investigating agencies identify fraudulent players. Money Circulation Scheme has the same meaning as defined under Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978. It bars direct selling companies from charging any entry fee from agents or compelling them to buy back unsold stocks. These entities will have to enter into an agreement with direct sellers or agents, and give full refund or buy-back guarantee for goods and services sold to them. It also mandates direct sellers to constitute a grievance redressal committee to protect consumers’ right. It lays down remuneration system for the person engaged in direct selling firms on sharing of incentives, profit and commission. Adds provision for appointment of monitoring authority at both Union and state level to deal with the issues related to direct selling. Comment Ponzi schemes are banned under the Prize Chit and Money Circulation (Banning) Act, 1978. Though it is a Central Act but the respective State governments are the enforcement agency of this law. SEBI is also not having the regulatory purview of Ponzi schemes. These newly issued guidelines will allow states to make some change in their guidelines as per their localised requirements. These guidelines are necessary for better growth of the direct selling business. It will also help protect consumers as direct sellers can now be identified, and goods exchanged.

Source: : http://currentaffairs.gktoday.in, 13-09-2016

Union Government issues model guidelines for states to curb Ponzi schemes

The Union Government has issued model guidelines for states to regulate direct selling and multi-level marketing businesses to protect consumers from Ponzi frauds. These model guidelines titled the Direct Selling Guidelines 2016 framework was released by Union Food and Consumer Affairs Minister Ram Vilas Paswan in New Delhi. Key features of guidelines The direct selling has been clearly defined as marketing, distribution and sale of goods or providing of services as a part of network of direct selling. The legitimate direct selling is differentiated from pyramid and money circulation schemes in order to help investigating agencies identify fraudulent players. Money Circulation Scheme has the same meaning as defined under Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978. It bars direct selling companies from charging any entry fee from agents or compelling them to buy back unsold stocks. These entities will have to enter into an agreement with direct sellers or agents, and give full refund or buy-back guarantee for goods and services sold to them. It also mandates direct sellers to constitute a grievance redressal committee to protect consumers’ right. It lays down remuneration system for the person engaged in direct selling firms on sharing of incentives, profit and commission. Adds provision for appointment of monitoring authority at both Union and state level to deal with the issues related to direct selling. Comment Ponzi schemes are banned under the Prize Chit and Money Circulation (Banning) Act, 1978. Though it is a Central Act but the respective State governments are the enforcement agency of this law. SEBI is also not having the regulatory purview of Ponzi schemes. These newly issued guidelines will allow states to make some change in their guidelines as per their localised requirements. These guidelines are necessary for better growth of the direct selling business. It will also help protect consumers as direct sellers can now be identified, and goods exchanged.

Source: : http://currentaffairs.gktoday.in, 13-09-2016