|
|
 Source/Author: |  Posted on: September 17th, 2008
Mr. Steven Spielberg once offered to finance a movie based on the great Indian Epic ‘Mahabharata’… Here’s the reply he got from the govt. of India:
Government of India
Ministry of Human Resources Development
Department of Culture
Films Division
No. B1452/234/2003 Dt. 23.6.07
To,
Shri. S. Spielberg,
Film Director, Hollywood
Camp Mumbai
Ref: Film story submitted by you, regarding financing of films by Government of India, Your letter dt. 2.12.90
The undersigned is directed to refer the above letter and state that the Government has examined your proposal for financing a film called ”Mahabharat’. The Very High Level Committee constituted for this purpose has been in consultation with the Human Rights Commission, National Commission for Women and Labour Commission, in addition to various Ministries and State Governments and have formed definitive opinions about the script. Their observations are as below:
- In the script submitted by you it is shown that there were two sets of cousins, namely, the Kauravas, numbering one hundred, and the Pandavas, numbering five. The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare has pointed out that these numbers are high, well above the norm prescribed for families by them. It is brought to your kind attention that when the Government is spending huge amounts for promoting family planning, this will send wrong signals to the public. Therefore, it is recommended that there may be only three Kauravas and one Pandava.
- The Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs has raised an issue whether it is suitable to depict kings and emperors in this democratic age. Therefore, it is suggested that the Kauravas may be depicted as Honourable Members of Parliament (Lok Sabha) and the Pandava may be depicted as Honourable Member of Parliament (Rajya Sabha). The ending of the film shows the victory of the said Pandavas over the said Kauravas. The ending may be suitably modified so that neither ofthe Honourable Members of Parliament are shown as being inferior to the other.
- The Ministry of Science and Technology has observed that the manner of birth of Kauravas is suggestive of human cloning, a technology banned in India. This may be changed to normal birth.
- The National Commission for Women has objected that the father of Pandavas, one Sri Pandu, is depicted as bigamous, and also there is only one wife for the Pandavas in common. Therefore suitable changes may be made in the said script so that the said Sri Pandu is not depicted as bigamous. However, with the reduction in number of Pandavas as suggested above, the issue of polyandry can be addressed without further trouble.
- The Commission for the Physically Challenged has observed that the portrayal of the visually impaired character ‘Dhritharastra’ is derogatory. Therefore the said character may not be shown as visually impaired.
- The Department of Women and Child Development have highlighted that the public disrobing of one female character called ‘Draupadi’ is objectionable and derogatory to women in general. Further the Home Ministry anticipates that depiction of such scenes may create law and order problem and at the same time invite strong protests from the different women forums. Such scenes may also invite penal action under SITA (Suppression of Immoral Traffic Act), therefore they may be avoided and deleted from the film.
- It is felt that showing the Pandava and the Kauravas as gamblers will be anti-social and counterproductive as it might encourage gambling. Therefore, the said Pandavas and Kauravas may be shown to have engaged in horse racing.. (Hon. Supreme Court has held horse racing not to be gambling)
- The Pandavas are shown as working in the King Virat’s employment without receiving any salary. According to the Human Rights Commission, this amounts to bonded labour and may attract provisions of The Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976. This may be corrected at once.
- In the ensuing war, one character by name Sri Abhimanyu has been shown as fighting. The National Labour Commission has observed that, war being a hazardous industry, and the said character being 16 years old, this depiction will be construed as a case of child labour. Also there is no record of his being paid any compensation. This may also be deemed to be violatory of the provisions of The Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 and Minimum Wages Act, 1948. Such references in the film may be removed.
- The character ‘Sri Krishna’ has been depicted as wearing a peacock feather. The peacock is our National Bird and wearing dresses made from peacock feather is an offence under the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972. This may not be depicted.
- Smt Maneka Gandhi has raised very serious objection for using any elephants or horses in war scenes, since there is every scope for mistreatment and injury to the said animals. The provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1890 and Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Amendment) Act, 1960 would be applicable in the instant case. Suitable changes may be made in the script to address the objections raised.
- In pursuance of the Memorandum of Ministry of Finance regarding austerity measures, it is informed that in the battle field sequences, only ten soldiers may be allowed for each side. Also, all the characters may be shown to have obtained a valid license under the Arms Act, 1959 as well as the Indian Arms Act, 1878.
You are therefore requested to modify the script along the lines indicated above and resubmit it to the undersigned at the earliest.
Sd/-
Under Secretary
Ministry of Information & Broadcasting
Prasar Bharti
Source/Author: | Posted on: January 16th, 2007
The local newspaper in our city published an article “The science of rituals”: Online Version
The following is what I wrote to the editor responding to the article…
Reading such an article that claims that there is science (if any) behind such meaningless religious rituals, demeans all the knowledge of science gathered by eminent scientists over the centuries. Let’s take the instances from the article at hand.
Prof Geetha mentions that there is a logic to all this, which is getting lost. Of course there must have been some logic to it when it was initially conceived centuries ago. That logic might or might not be scientific at all. But in my opinion, since the original logic is indeed lost, we are perhaps trying to attach some false logic to them today based on some half-baked pseudo-scientific knowledge of the individuals. Speaking, for instance, about the dung lining near the threshold; author mentions that it produces methane in the presence of sunlight and forms a thin film preventing the entry of bacterial pathogens. Nothing can be further from scientific truth, which is, the methane produced out of the dung is what gives it the pungent smell and it is a gas much lighter than air. So, as soon as it is generated, it immediately rises up in the air and reaches the upper atmosphere, in turn contributing greatly to the global warming phenomenon. Moreover this gas is much more harmful to the human beings than any bacterial pathogens. Had it been useful in preventing bacteria, don’t you think cow dung would be the most hygienic substance to eat?
Coming to the concept of cooking rice; author mentions that “Cooking rice under the morning sun helps absorb Vitamin D”. From the statement it’s not clear as to whom does it help. Does it mean the rice absorbs Vitamin D, or does it mean the person who eats that rice absorbs Vitamin D? Whichever be the meaning, science contradicts with it. Vitamin D is a substance that can be present ONLY in animal flesh. It’s generated out of cholesterol within our body and cannot be supplied from any vegetative food we eat. So there is no relation of the rice, no matter how and where it is cooked, and absorption of Vitamin D. Rather cooking the rice outside the house attracts more dust and aerial microbes which are more likely to harm ones health that benefit it anyway.
Now the next ritual of making the cow cross the small fire made of dry hay; author mentions that it reduces the chances of some viral infections that are more likely to breed during this season. Once again looking at real science, can you actually believe that exposing an animal to a small fire three times for a fraction of seconds each time can have any effect on the (sometimes) deadly viruses which actually lurk much deeper within the animal? Moreover if camphor is even remotely antiviral, as claimed by the author, then don’t you think it’d be much more beneficial to make the animal eat it than performing an arthi, the fumes of which the animal would not even like to inhale?
Finally, out of curiosity, may I know the subject of specialization of Prof Geetha?
Source/Author: | Posted on: November 24th, 2005
Man is an omnivorous animal naturally. So being a pure vegetarian or a non-vegetarian entirely depends on ones own preferences and/or on medical, religious or other reasons. But saying that being a non-vegetarian is inhuman would be an entirely wrong statement, because it is absolutely natural for human to eat non-vegetarian food along with the vegetarian food.
I’d like to make it clear beforehand, that I am NOT a proponent or a propagandist for non-vegetarianism. But, it is a well proven fact that without animal food supplements it is very difficult or almost impossible to have an affordable exclusively vegetarian diet. This can be proven in historic as well as scientific ways.
Historic Proof:
- The most ancient of the cave paintings show hunts and not growing crops or vegetables.
- Civilizations have been traced by the bones accumulated at the site and not from rice or dhal at the site!
- Even Vedic scriptures prove that the Hindus, who claim to be pure vegetarians due to religious reasons, were absolute non-vegetarians in the Vedic age.
- You’ll find a reference about a yajna (Ritual) called ‘Gomedh’ in the Vedas, in which the cow was sacrificed as an important part of the yajna. As an example, this yajna is described in an ancient and famous scripture ‘Shabda-Kalpadrum’ as:
Yajna Vishesh: Atra strigopashu: mantreshu strilingpathat tatsya lakshanam – saptashafatva – navashafatva – bhagnashrungatva – kaanatva – chhinnakarnatvaadidosharaahityam. Tatsya prayogah, sarvoapi chhagpashuvat. Yajmanasya svargah falam, goshcha goloka praptih.
Meaning: It’s a vishesh (special) yajna. Here feminine gopashu (Cow) is referred to. These should be the lakshana (Symptoms) of it: It should not have either seven or nine legs, its horn shouldn’t be broken, neither one-eyed, nor ear-cut. It should be used up totally, like a goat, i.e. the cow should be behaved the way a goat is behaved with. This gomedh yajna will result in the attainment of swarga (Heaven) for the yajman (One for whom the ritual is carried out) and even the cow will attain something called golok.
- Many such similar references can be found in the other scriptures like Rigveda, Yajurveda, Upanishads, Mahabharat, etc.
- According to Swami Vivekananda himself, “He who does not eat beef (or meat for that matter), is not considered to be a good Hindu at all.” He also quotes, “There was a time in the Indian history, when no Brahmin was called so if he does not consume meat.
- In fact, the whole vegetarianism concept came into Hinduism after Buddha and Mahavira. Before that the Brahmins used to eat beef. All sacrifices involved eating the sacrificial animals.
Scientific Proofs:
- We have canine teeth which are used for tearing meat.
- The length of the intestine is short and more suggestive of a mixed diet. Even if man were to be an exclusive vegetarian, the Gastro intestinal tract cannot be used for vegetation. Man can consume only high energy food like fruits, cereals, meat etc.
- Man requires vitamin B12 which is exclusively from non-vegetarian sources, the least of them being milk.
- You may ask me, why milk is a non vegetarian food. No adult animal consumes milk except humans and those animals which are totally dependent like cats, dogs etc. After all milk is produced only in the mammary glands of mammals. So how can it be vegetarian?
- Moreover, the proteins of milk are exclusively animal proteins like lactalbumin, lacto globulins, lactose etc. The major milk protein casein is a phospho-protein which is not found in any plants.
- Human pancreatic juice contains an enzyme called collagenase, which hydrolyses collagen a protein found only in the animal tissues. No plant product contains this protein.
- The gastric juice of humans is acidic and contains pepsin an enzyme found in carnivores.
- Even honey, considered as a pure vegetarian food contains the saliva of bees!
- Harper, the most eminent author of the most referred to text book of biochemistry for generations of biochemists, medical, dental, veterinary, agriculture students says, “The best way to get the supply of amino acids in the quantities and proportions required by the human body is to consume human flesh!”. Since, cannibalism is neither accepted nor desirable, we are forced to look for other sources for the same. So, it is non-vegetarian food that comes close to it and not vegetarian.
- There are some tribes which cannot be vegetarian by any chance. The Eskimos have no vegetarian food of any sort. They are totally dependent on animal food. Similarly the Lapps (a tribe from the Russian region) cannot be vegetarians. Many people are totally dependent on animal food for their source of protein like fishermen who live by the sea.
- You can talk about the elephant, but you cannot eat grass like an elephant which has a multi chambered stomach and has bacterial fermentation chambers which can digest cellulose.
And still the Hindus shamelessly claim that their religion teaches them to be vegetarians… I fail to understand why?
|
|
Tags: 
