Sunday, 25 October 2015

Should we feel concerned, worried?

Should we feel concerned, worried?


1. ‪#‎Gulzar‬ (Sampooran Singh Kalra), living in India since
1934:
"We have never witnessed this kind of religious intolerance in India."
http://goo.gl/XvuUWM )
2. ‪#‎AdmiralRamdas‬, Former Chief of Naval Staff, living in India since
1933:
"I am forced to hang my head in shame" over the attacks today."
Writes to the President.
http://goo.gl/Uyt7Nr )
3. ‪#‎RomilaThapar‬, living in India since
1931:
"We are now a society that openly displays its prejudices."
http://goo.gl/Ky8R7b )
4. ‪#‎NayantaraSahgal‬, daughter of Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit, living in India since
1927:
"There are times in history when you have to stand up."
http://goo.gl/cmn1nC )
They were in their youth when India got ‪#‎INDEPENDENCE‬ .
They were In their 40s when the ‪#‎EMERGENCY‬ was declared.
They lived through ‪#‎PARTITION‬‪#‎WARS‬‪#‎RIOTS‬!
All of them collectively expressing against at the present situation!
Still many, who ‪#‎BornIn1980‬&90s, on social media and from ruling dispensation say:
'What do you know about India, you anti-national!!; send these **** to Pa****! )'

Saturday, 19 September 2015

Examine the feminist perspective of state and state security

Examine the feminist perspective of state and state security

The core of the feminism as an ideology lies at the generations old discrimination that the woman has faced just because of her gender. So, obviously the feminist mind has thought about state and the security of the state as a subject where those decimations can be nullified by providing enhanced explanations and revolutionary views.

Existence of a ‘structured’ system of promoting discrimination’ is the belief of feministic mind. Feminists look at the state as the expansion of that patriarchal society as such. Institutionalisation of patriarchy, patriarchal society and systems based on gender is perhaps more dangerous than anything else for a woman to be saved from the attacks of patriarchy proponents. That is what more or less state is all about. The state, because it is a reflection of people’s society more or less a patriarchal society attempts vehemently to control woman’s role. Reproduction – which is woman’s only domain, inheritance – which is actually to be considered as righteous right of a born and sexuality are governed and regulated by the state. The mental stigma that ‘woman’ is to be ‘protected’ by the man actually leads woman giving up her autonomy. The systematic deconstruct of the concept of state by Sylvia Walby quite clearly points out to woman’s labour and reproduction as objects of control by the state. It is evident that the perspective of feminists of the state is perhaps rightly influenced by the discrimination emanates out of patriarchy.

Over the period of time with the advent of feministic movements allied with other social movements, the state is compelled to change with time progressively. High emphasis and respect for democratisation served well to woman good. The woman’s reservation in parliaments, assemblies and institutions of self-government are at the centre stage of national debate in many countries. Electoral pressures and intellectualism have pushed many nation-states to sign conventions like Convention on Eliminating Discrimination Against Woman (CEDAW). Multi-national and international organisations have upped their mark to push change in pre-meditated conceptualisation of state by asking elimination of men’s only views regime is a right approach. From employment to violence, the patriarchal proponents and the philosophy as such have been challenged quite firmly because of positive effects of this new feministic conceptualisation of the state.

Well, it is quite obvious that in every sphere of state affairs the feminists look at the roles affecting woman that is quite different than the conventional. State security too is thought a bit different way. Men are those who fought and fight wars. It is man’s domain. There are the conventional thoughts. The feminists are critical of these views. They find state security affairs help patriarchal enthusiast to propend. Woman has historically been the victim of inhuman wartime crimes like mass rape etc. Feminism argues to broaden the very concept of security. It supports a theory where security related conflicts are not merely managed with the help of security personnel only but there is a need to have a sea change in understanding the idea of security of the state. This idea and perspective to security affairs should be understood and expound to keep peace with democratisation processes. Empowering the affected is one of the core way-outs accepted in this concept. The feministic perspective to state security somehow indicates to adopt peaceful measures as the violent conflicts management has historically dramatically cost more on women who are usually outside the state priority.


The feminist urges for peaceful approaches while dealing with the state security. This perspective is quite remarkable as it propends gender equality in a structured institutionalised system called the state.

Friday, 18 September 2015

Changing dimensions of security in post-cold war period

Changing dimensions of security in post-cold war period

An impactful outcome of the end of cold war on global security affairs is the world where military interventions were became the only threats to the security. There came the era where security affairs have to be thought in relation to environment, economy, culture and perhaps least in relation to military interventions. Changing dimensions of security in post-cold war period cab be discussed efficiently under the following broad topic heads:
®Rise in conflicts related to separatism and ethnic nationalism.
®International terrorism threating global peace.
®Change in approaches to interstate competition since economic worries get the centre stage.
®Rise in threats to environment.

The post-cold war era can be predominantly termed as modern era of civil wars. The established peaceful lines separating a state from the other were and are being challenged. Apart from more conflicts are of intra state nature than interstate. In the middle east, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria,  Jordan, Israel, Palestine, Yemen, Pakistan etc. , in the Africa, Somalia, Sudan, Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Mali, Niger, Congo etc. are few of the states badly affected by advent of civil wars. In civil wars, there nothing ‘civil’ in that. Few of the deadliest weapons of modern era are being used against so called enemy mainly ending us hurting innocent citizens. The highest lose is of innocent civilians and their property. It seems the paradigm of security is now changed to human centric than state centric especially after cold war. Human security is prime is issue now.

Experiences of religious and radical intolerance have been gradually developed as form of terrorism. Radicalisation of religious beliefs is one of the gravest worries especially after the end of cold war. Amalgamation  of drug and trafficking mafia grouping with radical religious fronts with the blessings of selfish political outfits have created cross border networks of important supplies threatening the security of  the state. The havoc and charged atmosphere created after every successful terror attacks do weaken the state’s credulity and subsequently authority. This sort of atmosphere fuels the civil wars.

The most threatening establishment that has got its profound presence is international terrorist organisation. Majority of 35 odd terrorist organizations designated by the United Nations have come into existence after the end of cold war. The signature event showing the malicious and dangerous idea of these organizations was 9/11 in the US. It showed how the mightiest military power in the world could be shaken and faith of millions of peaceful people can be trembled. It is considered as a turning point in global security regime. The London bombings, attacks on embassy, Indian and Afghan parliaments and strong emergence of radical terrorist organization Al Qaeda under the leadership of Osama Bin Laden were few of the grave happenings that have defined the new state security realities in early 2000s. Recent advent of emergence of the Islamic State of Iraq and Levan (ISIL) is considered dangerous threat than the earlier to world peace.

Non-military threats to security are important aspects arose mainly after end of the cold war. There are two main subjects of a state with which threats to state security are being thought: 1. Matters related to economic stability and growth and 2. Matters concerning environmental degradation. Financial stability of a country, foreign flows, energy supplies are few of the most important sectors of economy that are now target in new world order. Economic insecurities are pushing for radical change in political regime as for example the Suhurto regime. It has ignited revolutions too many a times.  States like Nauru, Fiji, Kiribati, Borabora and entire Caribbean are under existential threats due to global environment degradation. The United Nations has recognised this fact for small developing islands. These nations are at the blink of submergence.


The post-cold war era has seen qualitative change and shift in the perception about threats to security. Non-military dimensions occupy considerable space in the imagination of security policy makers. That is a sea change and significant too along with worries for speedily rising civil wars and international terrorism.

Thursday, 23 July 2015

Widening of Tax base: Aspiring for new ideas but, not with old approaches, please!


Widening of Tax base: Aspiring for new ideas but, not with old approaches, please!

Written by,
Rajan D. Morbia
M. Planning (Regional Planning)
B. E. (Civil Engg.)

Tax for welfare

        It is a well-known fact that India is a welfare state. Socialism is embedded in the Constitution of India. Basically, for the welfare of the people especially the citizens with deprivations, the Government spends. For that purpose of spending, the Government gets monies from revenue, capital and non-debt receipts from deferent sources under the established law. To comprehend the situation of the Government, one need to have a look at the following facts. India had spent ₹ 1,55,141.47 crore in 1990-91 and ₹ 32,04,965.78 in 2013-14. India had revenue of ₹ 98,018.82 crore in 1990-91 and ₹ 23,23,056.84 in 2013-14. The gap between expenditure and revenue was ₹ 57,122.65 crore in 1990-91 and ₹ 8,81,908.94 crore in 2013-14. The deficit is understandable by comprehending these figures of fact. The most prominent source of revenue is tax receipts. The share of tax revenue in total revenue was 88% in 1990-91 and 87% in 2013-14. One now can imagine how such big role tax revenue has in the development story of India. 

        In India, tax collected is classified in two categories namely Direct taxes and Indirect taxes. Direct Tax is levied on the income, property or wealth of people, group of people, organisations or companies. In case of direct taxes the incidence and burden of tax is on same person or in other words a direct tax is borne entirely by the entity that pays it, and cannot be passed on to another entity. Indirect Tax is levied on production, consumption, expenditure (not on income or property); they are not levied directly on the final user. In case of indirect taxes the incidence and burden of tax may entirely not be on same person or in other words indirect tax may either entirely borne by the entity that pays it or may pass on it to another entity. In 1990-91, the share of direct tax and indirect tax collected in total tax revenue receipts was 14% and 86% respectively; while in 2013-14, those were 33% and 67% respectively. Notable is the fact that the share of direct tax collected has seen significant increase over the period of two and a half decade. The important merits of direct taxation are well known especially in the sphere of maintaining horizontal and vertical equity in the society. Within the kitty of direct tax, the share of taxes on income is quite considerable. In 1990-91, the share was 44% and in 2013-14, it is 35%. A decline in share is visible. Startlingly, the fact of the matter is that in India the total number of income tax payers is around 35 million only, according to a reliable study. It is to note that India is a country of more than 130 crore population with a mandate of being a social welfare state by the constitution of India. Well, astonishingly it is hard to believe that, even, out that 3.5 crore taxpayers, gigantic 85% pays tax for the income of ₹ 0 to ₹ 5 lakh!

Intentions for widening of tax base

        It is quite obvious and sincere of the finance ministry that it feels too much concerned about widening of the tax base. The press information bureau states in a note that at the inauguration of the 31st Annual Conference of Pr. Chief Commissioners /Pr. Directors General/ Chief Commissioners /Directors General of Income Tax, the Finance Minister of India has ‘exhorted’ the senior officers of the income tax department to be prompt in redressing the grievances of the tax payers, expand the tax base in a non-intrusive manner while striving to achieve the revenue generation targets. The importance of tax base widening efforts is a need of the hour to get the economy on a desired growth path and at the same time the government is looking up to an internationally competitive tax regime with a stable policy and a non-adversarial tax administration. Another point to note here is the direction given by the minister of state finance. The minister has urged the officials of the department to brainstorm to come-up with radical ideas to double the tax-GDP ratio. A news piece, in the Economic Times, states that the top brass of the income tax department has been asked to individually give three suggestions, ideas or proposals which will enable the government to augment revenue collection under the direct taxes category in the country and subsequently widen the tax base. There is news that the government has directed the income tax department to take steps to widen the tax base and add at least 25 lakh new assesses every month during the current financial year 2015-16. This is a huge task and if successfully and appropriately done, it has the potential to be proved as a fillip for the efforts of economic development. 

        In the backdrop of this policy level discussion that the officials of the income tax department are keeping themselves busy with the grass root level tax administration carrying out a sort of survey to find out proper proposals and ideas. An opportunity had been there for the interested ones to listen one of the senior most tax administrators of India Shree Amaresh C. Shukla, Indian Revenue Service (IRS) in this regard. He is currently posted as Principal, Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajkot. A 1983 batch IRS officer is a fabulous articulator in Hindi, that is what one may mark if one utilises the opportunity to listen him. Under the ages of businesspersons and tax consultant associations of Kutch district, a lecture was arranged for all on the subject of ‘widening tax base program’ at an expensive hotel in the out skirts of the city of Bhuj on 21st of July 2015.

        The lecture was packed with few announcements of the local income tax department and an explanation by the officer that the income tax department is in an aggressive mode, as such, for widening and deepening of tax base. With a sparkling analogy of ‘kauva’ and ‘hans’, it was made very clear to the tax consultants that the income tax department is in now quite an energetic state of affairs that all need to be alert as well as comfortable while dealing with the income tax administration in India. A non-tax payer, as a one who is not associated with tax administration as such and a tax consultant, can simply observe that the officer was with a positive outlook with a sense of balance in his postures as an authority to curb tax menaces and at the same time as an assertive facilitator for those who wish to pay tax as per the law stipulated. Before the key note speech by the officer, few of the senior tax consultants of the district had asserted their view about tax related compliance producers and related issues, collaboration within department and style of working at local income tax department, department’s and related agencies’ knowledge management approaches and most importantly the inconvenience faced by the tax payers. Few had posted their suggestions for tax base widening and deepening while speaking. But, the approach to the lecture seemed so cursory that many of the times, the speakers were unable to respect that the gathering was there to listen about ‘tax base widening’ proposals and issues but not ‘tax base deepening’ per se. The officer has uttered it bluntly but not without a point, that government is now aiming to be at your door step not to raid you but to facilitate you. There is no reason to feel afraid of the tax administration. The message of the government conveyed quite cunningly and effectively. He assured unsolicited that department is up to 80 per cent computerised and they have skill and will to take ‘tax base deepening’ measures quite rigorously, it is an alarm for those who run away from paying proper tax as per the rules. “Act, not just speak” dictum seems to be quite on his mind that the officer had announce a pakhavada for the refund related issues and asked the local administration staff present there to dispose the applications in following two weeks. He had impressed the gathering that he takes into consideration the grievances of the tax consultants quite smoothly. There were many other announcements and information for tax payers and consultants. 

        Sedate intellect was accompanied by the momentous remembering of the greats like Vivekanada and Vinoba Bhave, as the officer was an inspired human being; it seems, it has culminated in quite a persuasive and articulate speaker in him. Brushing the instances of the Rig Veda, informing the worried tax consultants that ‘except parbrahma, everything is imperfect’, the officer simply blanketed the gathering’s minds with spiritual springs and he asked them to work for Atma when the department asks them to help and assist for widening of tax base. He explained the gathering how it is like ‘working for Atma’ in the tax administration quite wittingly! A polite but powerful as a rock, message by the officer on behalf of the government was that it is high time that be alert and be a responsible citizen. Come out and pay tax for the development of nation; running away is not an option now since we are in the time of quite a robust information technology and communication age! The gathering was astonishingly convinced by the officer of higher rank that the department is looking up to fully automated, transparent, responsive, non-adversarial and non-discriminatory tax administration system. And, it will be a reality sooner or later but surely! Sounds of the national anthem quite all with velour and the gathering dispersed.

Contradictions and way to have new ideas

        Now, notably a thinking mind can establish a contradictory observation by going through the event as such. Note, who were the hosts! The event was hosted by a body related to businesspersons of a district level stature along with the tax consultants association. Most of the tax payers had not encountered any public notice via newspaper or any. Well, observing the present people in the gathering, they were all tax payers- tax consultants and businesspersons of a good stature. Remember, the subject of the event was ‘widening tax base program’. It is understandable that yes, the tax consultants and businesspersons are associated with tax administration with higher degree than the non-tax payers, but the very purpose of the event, as a thinking mind may understand, was to collect the ideas for widening of tax base especially in the sphere of income tax. Since the tax consultants and tax payers know how the income tax department works, their very psychological approach is to get their grievances addressed when they are provided the opportunity to interact with such an officer of higher rank as it is something that is related to her bread and butter. To dispose of the grievances of the consultants of tax payers (who are those who are already in the tax administration system) helps deepening tax base more than widening tax base. The difference between widening and deepening tax base is again subtly to be understood. This interaction between the department and the ones who are already in and associated with the tax administration system perhaps can or may only help to improve the ‘existing’ system, a system based on a bit old and tested ideas. The very fact of the matter is that the system based and built on old and tested ideas is not helping achieving wide tax base that a nation like India deserves especially in the income tax sphere of matters.

        Requesting, interacting and asking a practicing tax consultant to ‘inspire’ her acquaintances to pay tax is not a strategy that goes well with a thinking mind. Supposing an acquaintance of a tax consultant may be requested or inspired genuinely for paying income tax, back of the mind of a social and economic human there will be a birth of a suspicion that, in order to pay the tax I may have to pay fees to the one who is inspiriting me for paying tax- a tax consultant! It is contradiction. Though, it cannot be concluded that this strategy would be unable to produce results at all as the empirical study is not available to support, but one thing can be said surely, psychology it is unviable. It can help but it can’t be the most prominent strategy to widen tax base. Knowing all this, the even hosted was a misfit in the discourses if one may strictly think about having ‘new’ and ‘radical’ ideas for tax base widening. Well, but for sure this event may have provided other benefits to the community per se. 

        Aspiring for ‘new’ ideas, it is certain that ‘new’ minds are to be nurtured and asked. The non-tax payers of the day are the most potential laden pool of ideas which can help the administration. It is but for obvious reasons that they are not in know-how of the issues that the related people (i.e. tax consultants and businesspersons of high stature) find themselves associated with as the issues of mal practices and compliances arise when the norms of higher income slab is applied. It is because the quantum of monies and allied privileges offered are of attractive quality in those cases. After all, to widen the tax base, the government is looking up to the middle income group citizen to be covered in the tax system. With the growth in annual disposable income, India is to have more number of citizens who may pay tax. The concern is to make them feel comfortable to pay it.

        Instead of arranging a talk on widening of tax base with businesspersons and tax consultants only, it would be appraisable to sit with the non-taxpayers. Of course, officers need forums to sit with them to do the advocacy for tax paying systematically. The resolve to this boils down to a creation of a forum. There is an idea around that there needs to be a ‘tax payers association’ affiliated with the tax administration system. The broad aspects of this can be discussed. There should be a ‘tax payers association’ at city and taluk level or according to the jurisdictions of the direct tax departments but at grass root level. To attract the non-tax payers to the system, the government can try to attract them by offering incentives or tax deduction for a fixed time, for example say 3 years. There is a huge benefit out of that. The non-tax payer would be included in the system and thus administration may have his tax related history and profile. At the same time with the measures taken by the department to let the tax payers feel comfortable, they can actually inspire the tax payers directly with their performance per se. No intermediary to contact the tax payers in inspiring them would be needed. Once the system is established, the department will be having a wide base of tax payers with whom they can contact and sit directly and try to govern the world of tax more efficiently with the public participation approach.

        Here are the times where people live in an age where inspiring is only possible by performing. The point of contention is how one will communicate to the ones that they wish to be inspired that one is performing better than the past! Of course with the new approach, it is possible and not by the conventional, well thought older days’ approaches and systems. Let there be wide tax base for nation’s benefits only!

References (links):

http://finmin.nic.in/reports/IPFStat201314.pdf 
http://www.finmin.nic.in/reports/IPFStat201213.pdf 
http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/tax/comparison-between-direct-and-indirect-taxes-with-figure/26391/ 
http://wealth18.com/number-of-income-tax-payers-in-india/ 
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=121992 
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/policy/government-asks-top-income-tax-officers-to-ideate-for-widening-tax-base/articleshow/47663001.cms

Saturday, 11 July 2015

āŠĻāŠ—āŠ° āŠĻિāŠŊોāŠœāŠĻ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠļāŠŪાāŠœāŠĻી āŠļāŠđāŠ­ાāŠ—ીāŠĪા

āŠķીāŠ°્āŠ·āŠ•: āŠĻāŠ—āŠ° āŠĻિāŠŊોāŠœāŠĻ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠļāŠŪાāŠœāŠĻી āŠļāŠđāŠ­ાāŠ—ીāŠĪા

(If Gujarati font is not visible or readable click: https://goo.gl/31CUnF

        ‘āŠĩિāŠ•ાāŠļ, ‘āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠ—āŠĪિ, ‘āŠ—āŠĪિāŠķીāŠēāŠĪા, ‘āŠļāŠ°્āŠĩāŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĨāŠŪ, ‘āŠļૌāŠĨી āŠ†āŠ—āŠģ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠāŠĩા āŠ–āŠŽāŠ° āŠĻāŠđીં āŠ•ેāŠŸāŠēાāŠŊ āŠēોāŠ­ાāŠŪāŠĢા āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ›ાāŠĪીāŠĻે āŠ—āŠĶāŠ—āŠĶ āŠŦુāŠēાāŠĩી āŠĶે, āŠĪેāŠĩા āŠķāŠŽ્āŠĶોāŠĻા āŠāŠ• āŠĩિāŠķેāŠ· āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĩાāŠđāŠĨી āŠ•āŠš્āŠ›āŠĻું āŠœાāŠđેāŠ° āŠœીāŠĩāŠĻ āŠ–āŠĶāŠŽāŠĶāŠĪું āŠĶેāŠ–ાāŠ‡ āŠ°āŠđāŠŊુ āŠ›ે. āŠ† āŠķāŠŽ્āŠĶોāŠĻા āŠļાāŠšા āŠ…āŠ°્āŠĨો, āŠ…āŠđીંāŠĻી āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠœાāŠĻા āŠđāŠ•ીāŠ•āŠĪāŠĻા āŠœીāŠĩāŠĻāŠŪાં āŠ‰āŠĪāŠ°્āŠŊા āŠ›ે āŠ•ે āŠ•ેāŠŪ, āŠ āŠ˜āŠĢાāŠŊ āŠœાāŠ—ૃāŠĪ āŠĻાāŠ—āŠ°ીāŠ•ોāŠĻા āŠŪāŠĻāŠĻો āŠāŠ• āŠ•ુāŠĪુāŠđāŠē āŠ­āŠ°્āŠŊો āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠķ્āŠĻ āŠ›ે. āŠ† āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠķ્āŠĻ āŠķા āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠĨાāŠŊ āŠ›ે? āŠšāŠēો, āŠđાāŠē āŠŠāŠ°ંāŠĪુ āŠ•āŠĶાāŠš āŠ—્āŠ°ાāŠŪિāŠĢ āŠ•āŠš્āŠ›āŠĻે āŠāŠ• āŠĪāŠ°āŠŦ āŠŪુāŠ•ીāŠ, āŠŠāŠĢ āŠœāŠŊાāŠ°ે āŠ•āŠš્āŠ›āŠĻા āŠŪુāŠ–્āŠŊ āŠŪāŠĨāŠ• āŠāŠĩા āŠ­ુāŠœāŠŪાં āŠ°āŠđેāŠĪો āŠĻીāŠĩાāŠļી āŠ˜āŠ°āŠĻી āŠŽāŠđાāŠ° āŠĻીāŠ•āŠģે āŠāŠŸāŠēે āŠāŠĻું āŠļ્āŠĩાāŠ—āŠĪ āŠāŠ• āŠ•ાંāŠŸાāŠĻી āŠœેāŠŪ āŠ–ુāŠšāŠĪો āŠ…āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨા āŠ­āŠ°્āŠŊો āŠŪાāŠđોāŠē āŠ•āŠ°ે āŠ›ે āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ āŠĻિāŠĩાāŠļીāŠĻે āŠ† āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠķ્āŠĻ āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩા āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠŠ્āŠ°ેāŠ°ે āŠ›ે āŠ•ે āŠđāŠ•ીāŠ•āŠĪે āŠĩિāŠ•ાāŠļ āŠĪāŠ°āŠŦ āŠ†āŠĩા āŠ…āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠ­āŠ°્āŠŊા āŠŪાāŠ°્āŠ— āŠĨી āŠœ āŠœāŠĩાāŠĪું āŠđāŠķે āŠ•ે āŠ•ેāŠŪ? āŠ† āŠ…āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨા āŠ•ે āŠœે āŠĻાāŠ—āŠ°ીāŠ• āŠķāŠđેāŠ° āŠĻા āŠ˜ોંāŠ˜ાāŠŸāŠŪાં, āŠķાāŠđેāŠ°āŠĻી āŠ—ંāŠĶāŠ•ીāŠŪાં āŠ…āŠĻે āŠāŠĩી āŠ˜āŠĢીāŠŊ āŠĪāŠ•āŠēીāŠŦ āŠŠંāŠđોāŠšાāŠĄāŠĪી āŠŽાāŠŽāŠĪોāŠŪાં āŠ…āŠĻુāŠ­āŠĩે āŠ›ે. āŠ˜āŠ°ે āŠ°ાāŠĪ્āŠ°ે āŠŸેāŠēિāŠĩિāŠāŠĻ āŠŠāŠ° āŠ†āŠŠāŠĢા āŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊāŠĻા, āŠ†āŠŠāŠĢા āŠœીāŠē્āŠēા āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ•āŠĶાāŠš āŠ†āŠŠāŠĢા āŠķેāŠđāŠ° āŠĩિāŠķેāŠĻા āŠŪોāŠŸા-āŠŪોāŠŸા āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ­āŠ­āŠ•ાāŠĶાāŠ° āŠĩāŠ–ાāŠĢો āŠļાંāŠ­āŠģે āŠ…āŠĻે āŠļāŠĩાāŠ°ે āŠ‰āŠ ીāŠĻે āŠ˜āŠ°āŠĻી āŠŽāŠđાāŠ° āŠĻીāŠ•āŠģે āŠāŠŸāŠēે, āŠāŠœ, āŠāŠ• āŠĻીāŠ°ાāŠķાāŠŠુāŠ°્āŠĢ āŠ…āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨિāŠĪ āŠķāŠđેāŠ°ી āŠŪાāŠđોāŠē āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ āŠ•ાāŠģāŠœાāŠģ āŠ—āŠ°āŠŪીāŠĨી āŠŦેāŠēાāŠĪો āŠ—ુāŠļ્āŠļો; āŠ† āŠļāŠ°્āŠĩે āŠŠાāŠļાāŠ“ āŠœાāŠđેāŠ° āŠœીāŠĩāŠĻāŠĻા, āŠāŠĩા āŠ›ે āŠ•ે, āŠœે āŠāŠ• āŠĻીāŠ°ાāŠķાāŠĩાāŠĶી āŠĻાāŠ—āŠ°ીāŠ• āŠĻે āŠœāŠĻ્āŠŪ āŠ†āŠŠે āŠ›ે. āŠĻાāŠ—āŠ°ીāŠ•, āŠ•ે āŠœે āŠ—ંāŠĶāŠ•ીāŠĨી āŠķāŠđેāŠ°ી āŠļુંāŠĶāŠ°āŠĪા āŠĪāŠ°āŠŦ, āŠ…āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠŊી āŠļુāŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨા āŠĪāŠ°āŠŦ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ˜ોંāŠ˜ાāŠŸāŠĨી āŠļāŠ­્āŠŊ āŠļંāŠĩાāŠĶ āŠĪāŠ°āŠŦ āŠĩિāŠšાāŠ°āŠĪો āŠđોāŠŊ āŠāŠĻે āŠŠāŠĢ āŠĻિāŠ°ાāŠķ āŠ•āŠ°ી āŠŪુāŠ•ે āŠāŠĩો āŠ•ંāŠ‡āŠ• āŠ† āŠŪાāŠđોāŠē āŠ›ે āŠāŠŪ āŠœāŠĢાāŠŊ āŠ›ે.
        āŠœāŠŊાāŠ°ે āŠ•āŠš્āŠ› āŠĻāŠđી āŠĶેāŠ–ા āŠĪો āŠ•ુāŠ› āŠĻāŠđી āŠĶેāŠ–ા” āŠĻી āŠēોāŠ­ાāŠŪāŠĢી āŠŸેāŠēીāŠĩિāŠāŠĻ āŠœાāŠđેāŠ°ાāŠĪો āŠĨી āŠ†āŠ•āŠ°્āŠ·ાāŠ‡āŠĻે, āŠ…āŠŪુāŠ• āŠĶાāŠĩાāŠ“ āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠŪાāŠĢે āŠĩિāŠķ્āŠĩāŠ­āŠ°āŠĨી āŠēોāŠ•ો āŠđāŠĩે āŠ•āŠš્āŠ›āŠĻી āŠŪુāŠēાāŠ•ાāŠĪ āŠēāŠ‡ āŠ°āŠđāŠŊા āŠ›ે, āŠĪ્āŠŊાāŠ°ે, āŠāŠĩી āŠļ્āŠĨિāŠĪિāŠŪાં, āŠ† āŠ•āŠš્āŠ›āŠĻા āŠķāŠđેāŠ°ો āŠ•ે āŠœે āŠĪિāŠĨિ āŠĶેāŠĩો āŠ­āŠĩ āŠĻી āŠļંāŠļ્āŠ•ૃāŠĪિāŠŪાં āŠŪાāŠĻāŠĩાāŠĻો āŠĶાāŠĩો āŠ•āŠ°ે āŠ›ે, āŠ āŠ•āŠˆ āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠ† āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĩાāŠļી āŠŽંāŠ§ુāŠ“āŠĻું āŠļ્āŠĩાāŠ—āŠĪ āŠ•āŠ°āŠķે? āŠ°āŠļ્āŠĪાāŠ“āŠĻા āŠ–ાāŠĄાāŠĨી, āŠŠાāŠĢી āŠ­āŠ°ેāŠē āŠ–ાāŠŽોāŠšીāŠŊાāŠ“āŠĨી, āŠ†āŠĄેāŠ§āŠĄ āŠšાāŠēāŠĪા āŠĩāŠđાāŠĻોāŠĨી, āŠ āŠĩાāŠđāŠĻોāŠĨી āŠļāŠ°્āŠœાāŠĪા āŠĪુāŠš્āŠ› āŠ˜ોંāŠ˜ાāŠŸāŠĨી, āŠ•ે āŠŠāŠ›ી āŠ āŠ…āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻા āŠļાāŠŪાāŠĻાāŠ°્āŠĨી āŠ°ૂāŦŦ āŠāŠĩા āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸ āŠĪંāŠĪ્āŠ°āŠĻા āŠŪોāŠŸા-āŠŪોāŠŸા āŠļ્āŠēોāŠ—āŠĻો āŠĨી? āŠ•āŠ‡ āŠ°ીāŠĪે? āŠāŠ• āŠĻીāŠ°ાāŠķ āŠĻાāŠ—āŠ°ીāŠ•āŠĻો āŠŪāŠĪ āŠ•ંāŠ‡āŠ• āŠāŠĩો āŠ›ે āŠ•ે, āŠ†āŠœ āŠ† āŠŽāŠ§ા āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĩાāŠļીāŠ“ āŠ•āŠĶાāŠš āŠ āŠŽોāŠēીāŠĩુāŠĄ āŠ°ંāŠ—āŠŪંāŠšāŠĻા āŠ…āŠ­િāŠĻેāŠĪાāŠĻા āŠŠાંāŠš āŠļાāŠ°ા āŠĄાāŠ‡āŠēોāŠ— āŠ…āŠĻે āŠŽે āŠļાāŠ°ી āŠœāŠ—્āŠŊાāŠĻી āŠŦોāŠŸોāŠ—્āŠ°ાāŠŦીāŠĨી āŠāŠ• āŠĩાāŠ° āŠĪો āŠ•āŠš્āŠ›āŠĻી āŠŪુāŠēાāŠ•ાāŠĪ āŠ‰āŠĪ્āŠļાāŠđāŠ­ેāŠ° āŠēāŠ‡ āŠŠāŠĢ āŠēે āŠŠāŠĢ āŠŠāŠ›ી? āŠŽીāŠœી āŠĩાāŠ° āŠ†āŠĩāŠķે? āŠķુ āŠ•ાāŠŪ āŠ†āŠĩāŠķે? āŠāŠĩી āŠĪો āŠ†āŠŠāŠĢે āŠ āŠĶુāŠ°āŠĨી āŠ†āŠĩેāŠēા āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĩાāŠļીāŠ“āŠĻે āŠķું āŠœāŠ°ૂāŠ°ી āŠļુāŠĩિāŠ§ાāŠ“ āŠŠુāŠ°ી āŠŠાāŠĄીāŠ āŠ›ીāŠ? āŠ•āŠš્āŠ›āŠĻા āŠŪુāŠ–્āŠŊ āŠŪāŠĨāŠ• āŠ­ુāŠœāŠĻા āŠ§િāŠ•āŠĪા āŠĩિāŠļ્āŠĪાāŠ° āŠāŠĩા āŠŽāŠļ āŠļ્āŠŸેāŠķāŠĻāŠĻી āŠ†āŠļāŠŠાāŠļāŠĻા āŠŽે āŠ•ીāŠēોāŠŪીāŠŸāŠ° āŠļુāŠ˜ીāŠĻા āŠĩિāŠļ્āŠĪાāŠ°āŠŪાં, āŠāŠ• āŠļ્āŠĩāŠš્āŠ› āŠ…āŠĻે āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠŊ āŠœાāŠœāŠ°ૂ-āŠŠેāŠķાāŠŽāŠĻી āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨા āŠđāŠœુ āŠļુāŠ˜ી āŠ†āŠŠāŠĢે āŠ‰āŠ­ી āŠ•āŠ°ી āŠķāŠ•āŠŊા āŠĻāŠĨી; āŠĪો āŠķું āŠ…āŠđીં āŠđાāŠēાāŠ•ી āŠ­ોāŠ—āŠĩāŠĩા āŠŽીāŠœીāŠĩાāŠ° āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĩાāŠļી āŠ†āŠĩāŠķે? āŠ†āŠĩી āŠ–ુāŠŽ āŠœ āŠļાāŠŪાāŠĻ્āŠŊ āŠŠāŠĢ āŠāŠ• āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĩાāŠļી āŠĪેāŠŪāŠœ āŠ•ોāŠˆ āŠŠāŠĢ āŠķāŠđેāŠ°āŠĻા āŠļાāŠŪાāŠĻ્āŠŊ āŠĻાāŠ—āŠ°ીāŠ• āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠœāŠ°ૂāŠ°ી āŠāŠĩી āŠ…āŠ—āŠĪ્āŠŊāŠĻી āŠ†āŠĩી āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠ“āŠĻો āŠđāŠœી āŠ•ોāŠ‡ āŠŠāŠĪો āŠĻāŠĨી, āŠĪો āŠ•āŠŊા āŠŪોંāŠĒે āŠ•āŠš્āŠ› āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĩાāŠļીāŠ“āŠĻે āŠŽીāŠœીāŠĩાāŠ° āŠŠāŠ§ાāŠ°āŠĩા āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠ†āŠ—્āŠ°āŠđ āŠ•āŠ°āŠķે āŠ āŠĩિāŠšાāŠ°āŠĢીāŠŊ āŠ›ે.
        āŠāŠĩી āŠēોāŠ• āŠĩાāŠŊāŠ•ા āŠ›ે āŠ•ે āŠ†āŠŠāŠĢું āŠĻેāŠĪૃāŠĪ્āŠĩ āŠ•āŠ°āŠĪાં āŠĪેāŠŪāŠœ āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸ āŠšāŠēાāŠĩāŠĪા āŠēોāŠ•ો āŠĶેāŠķ-āŠĩિāŠĶેāŠķāŠĻી āŠŊાāŠĪ્āŠ°ાāŠ“ āŠ•āŠ°ીāŠĻે, āŠļāŠŪāŠœીāŠĻે āŠ…āŠĻે āŠķીāŠ–ીāŠĻે āŠ†āŠĩે āŠ›ે, āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ•āŠš્āŠ›āŠĻા āŠĩિāŠ•ાāŠļāŠĻા āŠ•ાāŠŪāŠŪાં āŠ…āŠĩિāŠ°āŠĪ āŠŠāŠĢે āŠ›ેāŠē્āŠēા āŠ•ેāŠŸāŠēાāŠŊ āŠĶિāŠĩāŠļોāŠĨી āŠļāŠĩાāŠŊા āŠ•āŠš્āŠ›ી āŠĻી āŠœેāŠŪ āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊો āŠ•āŠ°ે āŠ›ે. āŠŠāŠĢ āŠœāŠŪીāŠĻāŠĻી āŠŠāŠ°િāŠļ્āŠĨિāŠĪિ āŠ•ંāŠ‡āŠ• āŠŽીāŠœી āŠœ āŠ›ે. āŠļāŠĪ્āŠŊāŠĪો āŠāŠĩું āŠœāŠĢાāŠˆ āŠ°āŠđāŠŊુ āŠ›ે āŠ•ે, āŠĶેāŠķ āŠĩિāŠĶેāŠķāŠĻી āŠķીāŠ– āŠĪો āŠ›ોāŠĄો āŠ†āŠŠāŠĢા āŠĶેāŠķāŠŪાં āŠ°āŠđેāŠēા āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠ·્āŠŸિāŠŸ āŠ…āŠ˜્āŠŊāŠŊāŠĻો (āŠ•ેāŠķ āŠļ્āŠŸāŠĄીāŠ) āŠĻે āŠŠāŠĢ āŠœો āŠ†āŠŠāŠĢે āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠš āŠĩિāŠšાāŠ°āŠĢા āŠđેāŠ āŠģ āŠēāŠ‡āŠ āŠĪો āŠ•āŠŊાંāŠŊ āŠœāŠĩાāŠĻી āŠœāŠ°ૂāŠ° āŠĻāŠĨી! āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ†āŠŪેāŠŊ āŠŠāŠĢ āŠ†āŠœ-āŠ•ાāŠē āŠŪાāŠđોāŠē āŠ•ંāŠ‡āŠ• āŠāŠĩો āŠ›ે āŠ•ે, āŠđāŠĩે āŠ­ાāŠ°āŠĪ āŠŽીāŠœાāŠĻે āŠķીāŠ–āŠĩāŠķે, āŠŽીāŠœા āŠ†āŠŠāŠĢāŠĻે āŠĻāŠđી!
āŠŽāŠ˜ી āŠļāŠŪāŠļ્āŠŊાāŠ“āŠĻા āŠŪુāŠģāŠŪાં āŠ›ે āŠķāŠđેāŠ°ી āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸāŠĻી āŠ•āŠģા. āŠ…āŠđીં āŠ āŠļ્āŠŠāŠ·્āŠŸ āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠĻોંāŠ§āŠĩા āŠœેāŠĩું āŠ›ે āŠ•ે āŠķāŠđેāŠ°ી āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸāŠ āŠŪાāŠĪ્āŠ° āŠšુંāŠŸાāŠŊેāŠēા āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĪિāŠĻિāŠ§િāŠ“ āŠĪāŠĨા āŠ…āŠ§િāŠ•ાāŠ°ીāŠ“āŠĻી āŠœ āŠœāŠĩાāŠŽāŠĶાāŠ°ી āŠĻāŠĨી āŠŠāŠĢ āŠāŠ•-āŠāŠ• āŠĻાāŠ—āŠ°ીāŠ•āŠĻી āŠ›ે. āŠŠāŠĢ āŠđા, āŠ āŠ…āŠēāŠ— āŠĩાāŠĪ āŠ›ે āŠ•ે, āŠāŠ•-āŠāŠ• āŠĻાāŠ—āŠ°ીāŠ• āŠķāŠđેāŠ°āŠĻા āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸāŠĻા āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊāŠŪાં āŠ•āŠˆ āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠ­ાāŠ—ીāŠĶાāŠ°ી-āŠļāŠđāŠ­ાāŠ—ીāŠĪા āŠ†āŠŠે, āŠ āŠ…ંāŠ—ેāŠĻી āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨા āŠŠાāŠ›ી āŠ†āŠœ āŠšુંāŠŸાāŠŊેāŠēા āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĪિāŠĻિāŠ§િāŠ“ āŠĪāŠĨા āŠ…āŠ§િāŠ•ાāŠ°ીāŠ“āŠ āŠ‰āŠ­ી āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩાāŠĻી āŠđોāŠŊ āŠ›ે.

āŠ‰āŠŠાāŠŊ: āŠļāŠŪાāŠœāŠĻી āŠļીāŠ§ી āŠļāŠđāŠ­ાāŠ—િāŠĪા

        āŠœāŠŊાāŠ°ે “āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠ“āŠĻી āŠ‰āŠĢāŠŠ”āŠĻે āŠĶુāŠ° āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩાāŠĻી āŠšāŠ°્āŠšા āŠĨાāŠŊ āŠĪ્āŠŊાāŠ°ે āŠēોāŠ•āŠķાāŠđીāŠŪાં āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠœાāŠ āŠ…āŠŠāŠĻાāŠĩેāŠēા āŠļાāŠ§āŠĻોāŠĻી āŠ—ોāŠ āŠĩāŠĢ āŠĩિāŠķે āŠĩાāŠĪ āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩી āŠ–ુāŠŽ āŠœāŠ°ૂāŠ°ી āŠŽāŠĻે āŠ›ે. āŠ•ેāŠĻ્āŠĶ્āŠ° āŠļāŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ°, āŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊ āŠļāŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ° āŠ…āŠĻે āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠļ્āŠĩāŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊāŠĻી āŠļંāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠ“ (āŠœેāŠĻે āŠ†āŠŠāŠĢે āŠĻāŠ—āŠ°āŠŠાāŠēિāŠ•ાāŠ“ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠŠંāŠšાāŠŊāŠĪો āŠĪāŠ°ીāŠ•ે āŠ“āŠģāŠ–ીāŠ āŠ›ીāŠ) āŠ āŠēોāŠ•āŠķાāŠđી āŠŪાં āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠœાāŠ āŠ†āŠŠāŠĻાāŠĩેāŠē āŠ‰āŠŠāŠĢ āŠĻિāŠĩાāŠ°āŠĢāŠĻા āŠļાāŠ§āŠĻો āŠ›ે. āŠ āŠĩાāŠĪāŠŪાં āŠ•ોāŠ‡ āŠŽે āŠŪāŠĪ āŠĻāŠĨી āŠ•ે, āŠļુāŠķાāŠļāŠĻāŠŪાં āŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊ āŠļāŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ° āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ•ેāŠĻ્āŠĶ્āŠ° āŠļāŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĻી āŠ­ુāŠŪિāŠ•ા āŠ…āŠĪ્āŠŊંāŠĪ āŠĻોંāŠ§āŠŠાāŠĪ્āŠ° āŠ…āŠĻે āŠŪāŠđāŠĪ્āŠĩāŠĻી āŠđોāŠŊ āŠ›ે, āŠŠāŠĢ āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠ†āŠ•ાંāŠ•્āŠ·ાāŠ“ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĶ્āŠ°āŠ·્āŠŸિāŠ•ોāŠĢો āŠĪāŠĨા āŠœāŠ°ૂāŠ°િāŠŊાāŠĪો āŠ…āŠĻે āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĪિāŠ­ાāŠĩોāŠŪાં āŠĩિāŠķાāŠģ āŠĩૈāŠĩિāŠ˜્āŠŊ āŠđોāŠĩાāŠĻે āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĢે āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠ•āŠ•્āŠ·ાāŠĻા āŠļુāŠļાāŠķāŠĻāŠĻા āŠļંāŠĶāŠ°્āŠ­āŠŪાં āŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊ āŠļāŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĻું āŠļીāŠ§ુ āŠļંāŠšાāŠēāŠĻ āŠ āŠ•āŠĶાāŠš āŠ…āŠķāŠ•āŠŊ āŠĻāŠđીં āŠĪો āŠŽāŠđુ āŠœ āŠ…āŠ˜āŠ°ી āŠœāŠĩાāŠŽāŠĶાāŠ°ી āŠ›ે.
āŠŽāŠļ āŠ† āŠœ āŠ…ંāŠĪāŠ°ાāŠŊ āŠ›ે āŠ•ે āŠœેāŠĻા āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĢે āŠāŠ• āŠŪāŠœāŠŽુāŠĪ āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠļ્āŠĩāŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊāŠĻી  āŠļંāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻા āŠĻિāŠ°્āŠŪાāŠĢ āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠ–ાāŠĪāŠ°ીāŠŠુāŠ°્āŠĩāŠ•āŠĻું āŠ‰āŠĻ્āŠĻāŠĪ āŠĩાāŠĪાāŠĩāŠ°āŠĢ āŠŽāŠĻાāŠĩāŠĩા āŠ•āŠĶાāŠš, āŠļāŠŪાāŠœāŠĻી āŠļીāŠ§ી āŠļāŠđāŠ­ાāŠ—ીāŠĪા āŠāŠ• āŠŪાāŠĪ્āŠ° āŠ‰āŠŠાāŠŊ āŠœāŠĢાāŠˆ āŠ°āŠđ્āŠŊો āŠ›ે. āŠļāŠŪાāŠœāŠĻી āŠļીāŠ§ી āŠļāŠđāŠ­ાāŠ—િāŠĪા āŠĻે āŠ…ંāŠ—્āŠ°ેāŠœીāŠŪાં āŠ•āŠŪ્āŠŊુāŠĻીāŠŸી āŠŠાāŠ°્āŠŸીāŠļીāŠŠેāŠķāŠĻ/āŠŠāŠŽ્āŠēીāŠ• āŠŠાāŠ°્āŠŸીāŠļીāŠŠેāŠķāŠĻ āŠ•āŠđે āŠ›ે. āŠļāŠŪāŠœāŠĩા āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠ āŠŽāŠđુ āŠļીāŠ§ી āŠ…āŠĻે āŠļāŠ°āŠģ āŠŽાāŠŽāŠĪ āŠ›ે, āŠ•ે āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠķ્āŠĻોāŠĻા āŠđāŠē, āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠ•āŠ•્āŠ·ાāŠ āŠļાāŠŪāŠĻો āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩી āŠŠāŠĄāŠĪી āŠĪāŠ•āŠēીāŠŦો āŠĪેāŠŪāŠœ āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠķ્āŠĻો āŠļાāŠĨે āŠļંāŠ•āŠģાāŠŊેāŠē āŠ…āŠĻ્āŠŊ āŠķāŠ•āŠŊ āŠĪāŠŪાāŠŪ āŠŽાāŠŽāŠĪોāŠĻું āŠœ્āŠžાāŠĻ, āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠļāŠŪાāŠœāŠĻે āŠđોāŠŊ āŠ›ે. āŠ āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĢે āŠœો āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠļāŠŪાāŠœāŠĻા āŠēોāŠ•ોāŠĻી āŠļીāŠ§ી āŠļāŠđāŠ­ાāŠ—િāŠĪા āŠĩિāŠ•ાāŠļāŠĻા āŠ•ાāŠŪોāŠĻી āŠĄિāŠાāŠ‡āŠĻ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ…āŠŪāŠēીāŠ•āŠ°āŠĢāŠŪાં āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠŊ āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠ•āŠ°ાāŠĩāŠĄાāŠĩāŠĩા āŠŪાં āŠ†āŠĩે, āŠĪો āŠ āŠĩિāŠ•ાāŠļāŠĻા āŠ† āŠ‰āŠ§્āŠŊāŠ—āŠŪ āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠ–ુāŠŽ āŠœ āŠŦāŠģāŠĶાāŠŊ āŠĻિāŠĩāŠĄે.
        āŠ† āŠŠāŠŽ્āŠēીāŠ• āŠŠાāŠ°્āŠŸીāŠķીāŠŠેāŠķāŠĻ (āŠļāŠŪાāŠœāŠĻી āŠļāŠđāŠ­ાāŠ—ીāŠĪા)āŠĻા āŠŪāŠđāŠĪ્āŠĩāŠĻે āŠļāŠŪāŠœીāŠĻે āŠœે-āŠĪે āŠļāŠŪāŠŊāŠĻી āŠ•ેāŠĻ્āŠĶ્āŠ°  āŠļāŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ°ે āŠķāŠđેāŠ°ી āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠļ્āŠĩāŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊāŠĻી āŠļંāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠ“āŠĻે āŠĻāŠ•āŠ•āŠ° āŠļ્āŠĩāŠ°ૂāŦŦ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠŽંāŠ˜ાāŠ°āŠĢીāŠŊ āŠŪાāŠĻ્āŠŊāŠĪા āŠ†āŠŠāŠĩા āŦ­āŦŠ-āŠŪો āŠŽંāŠ§ાāŠ°āŠĢીāŠŊ āŠļુāŠ§ાāŠ°ાāŠĻો āŠ•ાāŠŊāŠĶો, āŦ§āŦŊāŦŊāŦĻ āŠŠāŠļાāŠ° āŠ•āŠ°ી, āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻીāŠ• āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸāŠŪાં āŠļāŠŪાāŠœāŠĻી āŠļāŠđāŠ­ાāŠ—િāŠĪાāŠĻો āŠŪાāŠ°્āŠ— āŠŪોāŠ•āŠģો āŠ•āŠ°્āŠŊો āŠđāŠĪો. āŠ•ેāŠĻ્āŠĶ્āŠ° āŠļāŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ°ે āŠŠોāŠĪાāŠĻી āŠœāŠĩાāŠŽāŠĶાāŠ°ી āŠŠુāŠ°ી āŠ•āŠ°ી āŠŠāŠĢ āŠļાāŠšી āŠ•āŠļોāŠŸી āŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊ āŠļāŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĻી āŠđāŠĪી. āŠ† āŠŽંāŠ§ાāŠ°āŠĢીāŠŊ  āŠļુāŠ§ાāŠ°ા āŠĨāŠ•ી āŠ•ેāŠĻ્āŠĶ્āŠ° āŠļāŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ°ે āŠĻāŠ—āŠ° āŠĻિāŠŊોāŠœāŠĻ (āŠŸાāŠ‰āŠĻ āŠŠ્āŠēાāŠĻીંāŠ—), āŠœāŠŪીāŠĻ āŠ‰āŠŠāŠŊોāŠ—āŠĻા āŠ•ાāŠŊāŠĶાāŠ“, āŠ—āŠŸāŠ°, āŠŠાāŠĢી-āŠŠુāŠ°āŠĩāŠ ો āŠĪેāŠŪāŠœ, āŠĪેāŠĩા āŠ…āŠ—āŠĪ્āŠŊāŠĻા āŠĪāŠŪાāŠŪ āŠ…āŠĒાāŠ° āŠĩિāŠ·āŠŊો āŠ…ંāŠ—ેāŠĻા āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸāŠĻી āŠœāŠĩાāŠŽāŠĶાāŠ°ી āŠŽંāŠ§ાāŠ°āŠĢāŠĻી āŦ§āŦĻāŠŪી āŠļુāŠšી āŠĶ્āŠĩાāŠ°ા āŠĻāŠ—āŠ°āŠŠાāŠēિāŠ•ાāŠ“āŠĻે āŠļોંāŠŠāŠĩા āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊ āŠļāŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĻો āŠŪાāŠ°્āŠ— āŠ•ાāŠŊāŠĶાāŠ•ીāŠŊ āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠļāŠ°āŠģ āŠ•āŠ°ી āŠ†āŠŠ્āŠŊો āŠđāŠĪો. āŠŠંāŠ°āŠĪુ āŠ† āŠ…ંāŠ—ે āŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊ āŠļāŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ°ે āŠ•ેāŠŸāŠēી āŠœāŠĩાāŠŽāŠĶાāŠ°ીāŠ“ āŠ—ુāŠœāŠ°ાāŠĪāŠŪાં āŠĻāŠ—āŠ°āŠŠાāŠēિāŠ•ાāŠ“āŠĻે āŠļોંāŠŠી āŠ āŠāŠ• āŠ•ુāŠĪુāŠđāŠēāŠĻો āŠĩિāŠ·āŠŊ āŠ›ે, āŠœેāŠĻી āŠĻોંāŠ§ āŠēેāŠĩા āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠŊ āŠ›ે.
āŠļāŠķāŠ•િāŠĪāŠ•āŠ°āŠĢ āŠļાāŠĨે āŠļāŠđāŠ­ાāŠ—િāŠĪા āŠ āŠēોāŠ•āŠķાāŠđી āŠĒāŠŽે āŠļ્āŠĩāŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊāŠĻી āŠļંāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠ“āŠĻા āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸ āŠŪાāŠŸેāŠĻો, āŠ†āŠœāŠĻો āŠĻāŠđીં āŠŠāŠĢ āŠļāŠĶીāŠ“ āŠœુāŠĻો, āŠāŠ• āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊāŠĶāŠ•્āŠ· āŠ…āŠĻે āŠļ્āŠĩીāŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊ āŠĩિāŠšાāŠ° āŠ›ે, āŠœે āŠ­ાāŠ°āŠĪ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠŠāŠķ્āŠšિāŠŪāŠĻા āŠĶેāŠķોāŠŪાં āŠĩāŠ°્āŠ·ો āŠŠāŠđેāŠēા āŠŠāŠĢ āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊāŠ°āŠĪ āŠđāŠĪો. āŠŠāŠ°ંāŠĪુ āŠ†āŠ§ુāŠĻિāŠ• āŠ­ાāŠ°āŠĪāŠĻા āŠˆāŠĪિāŠđાāŠļāŠŪાં āŠĩāŠ°્āŠ·ોāŠĨી āŠŸોāŦŦ-āŠĄાāŠ‰āŠĻ” āŠ…āŠ­િāŠ—āŠŪ āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸી āŠĪંāŠĪ્āŠ°ોāŠĻી āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊāŠ•āŠ°āŠĩાāŠĻી āŠŠāŠ§્āŠ§્āŠĪીāŠĻી āŠ†āŠĪ્āŠŪાāŠŪાં āŠ°āŠđ્āŠŊો āŠ›ે. āŠ‰āŠŠāŠ° āŠŽેāŠ ેāŠēા āŠ…āŠ§િāŠ•ાāŠ°ીāŠ“ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠœાāŠĻા āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĪિāŠĻિāŠ§િāŠ“ āŠĻāŠ•āŠ•ી āŠ•āŠ°ે āŠĪે āŠĻિāŠĪિāŠ“ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊāŠ•્āŠ°āŠŪો āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠ•āŠ•્āŠ·ાāŠ āŠēોāŠ•ો āŠŠāŠ° āŠ ોāŠ•ી āŠŽેāŠļાāŠģāŠŪાં āŠ†āŠĩે āŠ›ે.  āІ āŠ…āŠ­િāŠ—āŠŪ āŠ•ે, āŠœેāŠĻે āŠŸોāŦŦ-āŠĄાāŠ‰āŠĻ” āŠ…āŠ­િāŠ—āŠŪ āŠ•āŠđેāŠĩાāŠŊ āŠ›ે, āŠĪેāŠĻી āŠđāŠĩે āŠŪોāŠŸાāŠ­ાāŠ— āŠĻી āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠœાāŠĻે āŠ•āŠĶાāŠš āŠāŠŸāŠēી āŠ†āŠĶāŠĪ āŠŠāŠĄી āŠ—āŠˆ āŠ›ે āŠ•ે āŠŪોāŠŸાāŠ­ાāŠ—ે āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠœા āŠ† āŠ…āŠ­િāŠ—āŠŪāŠĻો āŠĩિāŠ°ોāŠ§ āŠŠāŠĢ āŠ•āŠ°āŠĪી āŠĻāŠĨી. āŠŽāŠ§ા āŠŸેāŠĩાāŠˆ āŠ—āŠŊા āŠđોāŠŊ āŠāŠĩું āŠēાāŠ—ે āŠ›ે.
āŠ…ંāŠđીāŠĻી āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠœા āŠ† āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĻા āŠŸોāŦŦ-āŠĄાāŠ‰āŠĻ” āŠ…āŠ­િāŠ—āŠŪāŠĻે āŠŠāŠĄāŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĩાāŠŪાં, āŠđાāŠēāŠŪાં āŠĪો āŠēāŠ—āŠ­āŠ—  āŠĪāŠĪ્āŠŠāŠ° āŠĶેāŠ–ાāŠĪી āŠĻāŠĨી, āŠŠāŠ°ંāŠĪુ āŠ­ાāŠ°āŠĪ āŠĶેāŠķāŠŪાં āŠœેāŠĻા āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠļ્āŠĩāŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊāŠĻી āŠļંāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻા āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸāŠŪાં āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĻāŠ—āŠ°āŠœāŠĻોāŠĻી āŠļુāŠ–ાāŠ•ાāŠ°ીāŠĻા āŠ•્āŠ·ેāŠĪ્āŠ°āŠŪાં āŠķ્āŠ°ેāŠ·્āŠ  āŠ•ાāŠŪāŠ—ીāŠ°ી āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠĩāŠ–ાāŠĢ āŠĨાāŠŊ āŠ›ે, āŠĪેāŠĩા āŠ•ેāŠ°āŠģ āŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊāŠĻા āŠĻāŠ—āŠ°āŠœāŠĻો āŠ† āŠ…ંāŠ—ે āŠ•āŠˆંāŠ• āŠ†āŠ§ુāŠĻિāŠ• āŠ…āŠ­િāŠ—āŠŪ āŠ†āŦŦāŠĻાāŠĩે āŠ›ે. āŠĪેāŠ“ āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠ°ાāŠœ્āŠŊāŠĻા āŠ•ોāŠˆ āŠŠāŠĢ āŠ•āŠ•્āŠ·ાāŠĻા āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸ āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠŠāŠŽ્āŠēીāŠ• āŠŠાāŠ°્āŠŸીāŠķીāŠŠેāŠķāŠĻ (āŠļāŠŪાāŠœāŠĻી āŠļીāŠ§ી āŠļāŠđāŠ­ાāŠ—ીāŠĪા) āŠēāŠ—āŠ­āŠ— āŠ…āŠĻિāŠĩાāŠ°્āŠŊ āŠœેāŠĩી āŠ›ે. āŠ† āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ° āŠĻા āŠ…āŠ­િāŠ—āŠŪ āŠĻે “āŠŽોāŠŸāŠŪ-āŠ…āŠŠ” āŠ…āŠ­િāŠ—āŠŪ āŠĪāŠ°ીāŠ•ે āŠēોāŠ•ો āŠ“āŠģāŠ–ે āŠ›ે. āŠĪે āŠ…āŠ­િāŠ—āŠŪāŠĻે āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĢે āŠĪેāŠ“ āŠ†āŠœે āŠ­ાāŠ°āŠĪāŠ­āŠ°āŠŪાં āŠļાāŠŪાāŠœીāŠ• āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠ—āŠĪિāŠĻા āŠķિāŠ–āŠ° āŠŠāŠ° āŠļ્āŠĩāŠŪાāŠĻāŠ­āŠ°ે āŠšāŠŪāŠ•ી āŠ°āŠđ્āŠŊા āŠ›ે.

āŠ•ેāŠ°āŠģ: āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠœા āŠĶ્āŠĩાāŠ°ા āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠœાāŠ•ીāŠŊ āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊોāŠĻું āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸ

            āŠŪુāŠ–્āŠŊ āŠ‰āŠĶેāŠķ્āŠŊ āŠāŠĩો āŠđāŠĪો āŠ•ે āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸāŠĻી āŠļંāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠ“ āŠœેāŠĩી āŠ•ે āŠĻાāŠ—āŠ°āŠŠાāŠēીāŠ•ાāŠĻે āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻીāŠŊ āŠĩિāŠ•ાāŠļāŠĻી āŠļ્āŠĩāŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊ āŠļંāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠ“āŠŪાં āŠŠāŠ°િāŠĩāŠ°્āŠĪિāŠĪ āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩી. āŠ† āŠŠāŠ°િāŠĩāŠ°્āŠĪāŠĻ āŠēાāŠĩāŠĩા āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠŽે āŠŠāŠ°િāŠŽāŠģો āŦŦāŠ° āŠĩāŠœāŠĻ āŠ†āŦŦāŠĩાāŠŪાં āŠ†āŠĩ્āŠŊુ. āŠŠāŠ°િāŠŽāŠģ 1: āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸāŠĻી āŠœāŠĩાāŠŽāŠĶાāŠ°ીāŠ“ āŠŠૈāŠ•ી āŠŪોāŠŸા āŠ­ાāŠ—āŠĻી āŠœāŠĩાāŠŽāŠĶાāŠ°ીāŠ“ āŠ•ાāŠŊāŠĶાāŠ•ીāŠŊ āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠļ્āŠĩāŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊāŠĻી āŠļંāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠ“āŠĻે āŠļોંāŠŠāŠĩી āŠĪāŠĨા āŠŠāŠ°િāŠŽāŠģ 2: āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĩિāŠ•ાāŠļāŠĻા āŠ•ાāŠŪો āŠ…ંāŠ—ેāŠĻી āŠĻિāŠĪિāŠ“ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊāŠ•્āŠ°āŠŪોāŠĻી āŠŊોāŠœāŠĻાāŠ“āŠŪાં āŠļāŠŪાāŠœāŠĻી āŠļીāŠ§ી āŠļāŠđāŠ­ાāŠ—િāŠĪાāŠĻા āŠ…āŠ­િāŠ—āŠŪāŠĻે āŠĩāŠ§ુāŠŪાં āŠĩāŠ§ુ āŠŠāŠĪ્āŠĪેāŠœāŠĻ āŠ†āŠŠāŠĩું. āŠļāŠ°્āŠĩેāŠĻા āŠļāŠđāŠ•ાāŠ° āŠ…āŠĻે āŠļાāŠŪુāŠđીāŠ• āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊāŠĩાāŠđીāŠĨી āŠĩિāŠ•ાāŠļāŠĻે āŠēāŠ—āŠĪાં āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠķ્āŠĻોāŠĻું āŠĻિāŠĩાāŠ°āŠĢ āŠ āŠļāŠŪāŠ—્āŠ° āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸāŠĻું āŠđ્āŠĶāŠŊ āŠŽāŠĻ્āŠŊું āŠ…āŠĻે āŠēોāŠ• āŠ­ાāŠ—ીāŠĶાāŠ°ી/āŠļāŠŪાāŠœ āŠļāŠđāŠ­ાāŠ—િāŠĪા āŠ āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸી āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊāŠĩાāŠđીāŠ“āŠĻું āŠ…āŠĩિāŠ­ાāŠœāŠŊ āŠ…ંāŠ— āŠŽāŠĻ્āŠŊુ.
āŠĶુāŠ°āŠĶāŠ°્āŠķિāŠĪા āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ†āŠ§ુāŠĻિāŠ•āŠĪાāŠĻા āŠĶāŠ°્āŠķāŠĻ āŠ•āŠ°ાāŠĩāŠĪાં āŠ•ેāŠ°āŠēāŠĻા āŠ°ાāŠœ્āŠĶ્āŠĩાāŠ°ી āŠļāŠŪાāŠœે āŠŽુāŠ˜્āŠ˜િāŠœીāŠ“āŠĻી āŠĩાāŠĪāŠĻે āŠŪાāŠĻ āŠ†āŠŠી, āŠ† āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĻી āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻે āŠļāŠŪāŠ—્āŠ° āŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊāŠŪાં āŠ‰āŠ­ી āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩા āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠĩāŠ°્āŠ· 1996 āŠŪાં āŠāŠ• āŠ…āŠ­િāŠŊાāŠĻ, āŠુંāŠŽેāŠķāŠĻા āŠ§ોāŠ°āŠĢે āŠ‰āŠŠાāŠĄી āŠēીāŠ§ી āŠđāŠĪી. āŠ† āŠ…āŠ­િāŠŊાāŠĻāŠĻે āŠŠીāŠŠāŠē્āŠļ āŠŠ્āŠēāŠĻીંāŠ— āŠ•ેāŠŪ્āŠŠેāŠĻ āŠĪāŠ°ીāŠ•ે āŠ“āŠģāŠ–āŠĩાāŠŪાં āŠ†āŠĩે āŠ›ે. āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠœા āŠŠોāŠĪે āŠŠોāŠĪાāŠĻા āŠĩિāŠļ્āŠĪાāŠ°-āŠķāŠđેāŠ°āŠĻું āŠŠ્āŠēાāŠĻીંāŠ— āŠ•āŠ°ે āŠ āŠđેāŠĪુāŠĻે āŠļāŠ° āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩા āŠŸોāŠŠ-āŠĄાāŠ‰āŠĻāŠ…āŠ­િāŠ—āŠŪāŠĻે āŠĪિāŠēાંāŠœāŠēી āŠ†āŠŠી, āŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊ āŠļāŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ°ે āŠœāŠ°ૂāŠ°ી āŠ•ાāŠŊāŠĶાāŠ•ીāŠŊ āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠ•્āŠ°િāŠŊા āŠŠુāŠ°્āŠĢ āŠ•āŠ°ી āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠœાāŠĻે āŠ†ંāŠŪāŠĪ્āŠ°āŠĢ āŠ†āŠŠ્āŠŊું āŠ•ે āŠ†āŠŠ āŠ†āŦŦāŠĻા āŠĩિāŠļ્āŠĪાāŠ°āŠĻું āŠŠ્āŠēાāŠĻીંāŠ— (āŠĻિāŠŊોāŠœāŠĻ) āŠŠોāŠĪે āŠ•āŠ°ો. āŠ† āŠ…āŠ­િāŠŊાāŠĻ āŠ…ંāŠĪāŠ°્āŠ—āŠĪ āŠ•ુāŠē āŠ› āŠšāŠ°āŠĢો āŠŪાં āŠļāŠŪāŠ—્āŠ° āŠĻāŠ—āŠ°āŠĻા āŠŠ્āŠēાāŠĻીંāŠ— āŠĻી āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠ•િāŠŊા āŠŠુāŠ°્āŠĢ āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩા āŠŪાં āŠ†āŠĩી āŠđāŠĪી. āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĨāŠŪ āŠšāŠ°āŠĢ āŠŪાં āŠĻāŠ—āŠ°āŠŠાāŠēિāŠ•ાāŠ“āŠĻા āŠ‰āŠŠāŠŊોāŠ—āŠĨી āŠĩોāŠ°્āŠĄ āŠ•āŠ•્āŠ·ાāŠ āŠĻાāŠ—āŠ°ીāŠ•ોāŠĻી āŠŽેāŠ āŠ•ો āŠŪāŠģી. āŠŽેāŠ āŠ•ોāŠŪાં āŠĻાāŠ—āŠ°ીāŠ•ોāŠ āŠŠોāŠĪāŠŠોāŠĪાāŠĻા āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠķ્āŠĻો āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĩિāŠ•ાāŠļ āŠ…ંāŠ—ેāŠĻી āŠŽાāŠŽāŠĪોāŠĻા āŠ‰āŠŠાāŠŊો āŠ°āŠœુ āŠ•āŠ°્āŠŊા. āŠĪ્āŠŊાāŠ°āŠŽાāŠĶ āŠĶ્āŠĩિāŠĪીāŠŊ āŠšāŠ°āŠĢāŠŪાં āŠ† āŠ°āŠœુ āŠĨāŠŊેāŠē āŠŽાāŠŽāŠĪોāŠĻે āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠŊ āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠĻોંāŠ§્āŠŊા āŠŽાāŠĶ āŠ† āŠ‰āŠŠાāŠŊો āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ…āŠ­િāŠŠ્āŠ°ાāŠŊોāŠĻે āŠļંāŠŠુāŠ°્āŠĢ āŠŪāŠđāŠĪ્āŠĩ āŠ†āŠŠી, āŠļāŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ°ી āŠ…āŠ§િāŠ•ાāŠ°ીāŠ“ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠŽુāŠ˜્āŠ˜િāŠœીāŠ“āŠĻી āŠŸુāŠ•āŠĄીāŠ“āŠ āŠĶāŠ°ેāŠ• āŠĩોāŠ°્āŠĄāŠĻા āŠĄેāŠĩāŠēોāŠŠāŠŪેāŠĻ્āŠŸ āŠŠ્āŠēાāŠĻ āŠĪૈāŠŊાāŠ° āŠ•āŠ°્āŠŊા āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĪે āŠŠ્āŠēાāŠĻāŠĻા āŠ…āŠđેāŠĩાāŠē āŠŽāŠĻાāŠĩી āŠĪેāŠĻે āŠĄેāŠĩāŠēોāŠŠāŠŪેāŠĻ્āŠŸ āŠļેāŠŪિāŠĻાāŠ°āŠŪાં āŠĩોāŠ°્āŠĄ āŠ•āŠ•્āŠ·ાāŠ āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠœા āŠļāŠŪāŠ•્āŠ· āŠ°āŠœૂ āŠ•āŠ°્āŠŊા. āŠ† āŠŠ્āŠēાāŠĻ āŠŠāŠ° āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠŊ āŠ…āŠ­િāŠŠ્āŠ°ાāŠŊ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠœાāŠĻી āŠļāŠđāŠŪāŠĪિ āŠēેāŠĩાāŠŪાં āŠ†āŠĩ્āŠŊા. āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠķ્āŠĻો āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĩāŠ°્āŠ·ોāŠĨી āŠ…āŠŸāŠĩાāŠŊેāŠēા āŠĪેāŠŪāŠœ āŠ…āŠĻ્āŠŊ āŠĩિāŠ•ાāŠļāŠĻા āŠ•ાāŠŪો āŠœેāŠĩા āŠ•ે āŠ—āŠŸāŠ°āŠĻી āŠēાāŠˆāŠĻો, āŠŠાāŠĢીāŠĻા āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠķ્āŠĻો āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĩિāŠœāŠģી āŠ…ંāŠ—ેāŠĻી āŠĪāŠ•āŠēીāŠŦો, āŠāŠĩી āŠĪāŠŪાāŠŪ āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠēોāŠ•ોāŠĻે āŠŠāŠ°ેāŠķાāŠĻ āŠ•āŠ°āŠĪી āŠŽાāŠŽāŠĪો āŠĻે āŠđāŠē āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩા āŠ…āŠ°્āŠĨે, āŠĪ્āŠŊાંāŠĻી āŠœ āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠœા āŠĶ્āŠĩાāŠ°ા āŠŽāŠĪાāŠĩાāŠŊેāŠēા āŠ‰āŠŠાāŠŊāŠĻા āŠ†āŠ§ાāŠ° āŠŠāŠ° āŠŠ્āŠ°ોāŠœāŠ•ેāŠŸāŠļ āŠĪૈāŠŊાāŠ° āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩા āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠļ્āŠŠેāŠķીāŠŊāŠē āŠŸાāŠļ્āŠ• āŠŦોāŠ°્āŠļ āŠŽāŠĻાāŠĩāŠĩાāŠŪાં āŠ†āŠĩી; āŠœેāŠŪાં āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠĻાāŠ—āŠ°ીāŠ•ો, āŠœે āŠĪે āŠ•્āŠ·ેāŠĪ્āŠ°āŠĻા āŠĻિāŠ·્āŠĢાāŠĪો āŠ…āŠĻે āŠāŠ•-āŠ†āŠĶ āŠļāŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ°ી āŠ…āŠ§િāŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĻે āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻ āŠ†āŠŠāŠĩાāŠŪાં āŠ†āŠĩ્āŠŊું. āŠ† āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠĪૃāŠĪ્āŠĪીāŠŊ āŠšāŠ°āŠĢāŠŪાં āŠ† āŠŸાāŠļ્āŠ• āŠŦોāŠ°્āŠļ āŠĶ્āŠĩાāŠ°ા āŠĩોāŠ°્āŠĄ āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠŪાāŠĢે āŠĪāŠŪાāŠŪ āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠķ્āŠĻો āŠĻે āŠđāŠē āŠ•āŠ°āŠĪાં āŠŠ્āŠ°ોāŠœેāŠ•āŠŸāŠļ āŠŽāŠĻાāŠĩાāŠŊા āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĪેāŠĻા āŠĩિāŠ—āŠĪāŠĩાāŠ° āŠ…āŠđેāŠĩાāŠē āŠĪૈāŠŊાāŠ° āŠĨāŠŊા. āŠĪ્āŠŊાāŠ°āŠŽાāŠĶ āŠšોāŠĨા āŠ…āŠĻે āŠŠાંāŠšāŠŪા āŠĪāŠŽāŠ•્āŠ•ાāŠŪાં āŠšુંāŠŸાāŠŊેāŠēા āŠœāŠĻāŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĪિāŠĻિāŠ§િāŠ“ āŠĶ્āŠĩાāŠ°ા āŠĶāŠ°ેāŠ• āŠĩોāŠ°્āŠĄ āŠĪેāŠŪāŠœ āŠļāŠŪāŠ—્āŠ° āŠķāŠđેāŠ° āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠāŠ• āŠļāŠđીāŠŊાāŠ°ા āŠŠ્āŠēાāŠĻāŠĻે āŠŽāŠĻાāŠĩāŠĩાāŠĻું āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊ āŠķāŠ°ૂ āŠĨāŠŊુ. āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠŊ āŠšીāŠĩāŠŸāŠ­āŠ°્āŠŊા āŠ…āŠĩāŠēોāŠ•āŠĻો āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĩિāŠļ્āŠĪૃāŠĪ āŠšāŠ°્āŠšા āŠŽાāŠĶ, āŠāŠ• āŠķāŠđેāŠ° āŠ•āŠ•્āŠ·ાāŠĻો āŠĄેāŠĩāŠēોāŠŠāŠŪેāŠĻ્āŠŸ āŠŠ્āŠēાāŠĻ āŠŽāŠĻાāŠĩāŠĩાāŠŪાં āŠ†āŠĩ્āŠŊો. āŠ†āŠĩા āŠ•ેāŠ°āŠģāŠĻા āŠĶāŠ°ેāŠ• āŠķāŠđેāŠ°āŠĻા āŠŠ્āŠēાāŠĻāŠĻું āŠŠીāŠŠ્āŠēāŠļ āŠŠ્āŠēાāŠĻિંāŠ— āŠ•ેāŠŪ્āŠŠેāŠĻ āŠĻા āŠ…ંāŠĪિāŠŪ āŠāŠĩા āŠ›āŠŸ્āŠ ા āŠšāŠ°āŠĢāŠŪાં, āŠ‰āŠš્āŠš āŠ•āŠ•્āŠ·ાāŠĻા āŠ•્āŠ·ેāŠĪ્āŠ° āŠĻિāŠ·્āŠĢાંāŠĪો āŠĪેāŠŪāŠœ āŠŊોāŠœāŠĻા āŠĻિāŠ·્āŠĢાંāŠĪો āŠĶ્āŠĩાāŠ°ા āŠŪુāŠē્āŠŊાંāŠ•āŠĻ āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩાāŠŪાં āŠ†āŠĩ્āŠŊુ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠŊ āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠļāŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ° āŠĶ્āŠĩાāŠ°ા āŠŪંāŠœુāŠ°ી āŠ†āŠŠāŠŊા āŠŽાāŠĶ āŠ…āŠŪāŠēીāŠ•āŠ°āŠĢ āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩાāŠŪાં āŠ†āŠĩ્āŠŊું.
āŠ† āŠĪāŠŽāŠ•્āŠ•ા āŠĩાāŠ°āŠĻી āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩ્āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻી āŠ†āŠĪ્āŠŪાāŠŪાં, āŠ†āŠŠ āŠĻોંāŠ§āŠķોāŠĪો, āŠļāŠŪાāŠœāŠĻી āŠļāŠđāŠ­ાāŠ—ીāŠĪા āŠĻો āŠĩિāŠšાāŠ° āŠŪુāŠ–્āŠŊ āŠœāŠĢાāŠķે. āŠ† āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĻી āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻે āŠœો āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸીāŠĪંāŠĪ્āŠ° āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠŊ āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊāŠ°āŠĪ āŠ•āŠ°ી āŠķāŠ•ે āŠĪો āŠāŠĻે āŠļાāŠšા āŠ…āŠ°્āŠĨāŠŪાં āŠļાāŠŪાāŠĻ્āŠŊ āŠĻાāŠ—āŠ°ીāŠ•āŠĻું āŠļāŠķāŠ•િāŠĪāŠ•āŠ°āŠĢ āŠ•āŠđી āŠķāŠ•ાāŠŊ. āŠķāŠđેāŠ°āŠĻા āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠŠ્āŠēાāŠĻીંāŠ— āŠŪાāŠŸે, āŠ†āŠĩી āŠĻāŠ•્āŠ•āŠ° āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩ્āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻે āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĢે āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸી āŠĪંāŠĪ્āŠ°āŠĻે āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠķ્āŠĻો āŠđāŠē āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩા āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠœāŠ°ૂāŠ°ી āŠļāŠđāŠ•ાāŠ° āŠ†āŠŠો āŠ†āŠŠ āŠĻāŠ—āŠ° āŠœāŠĻો āŠĪāŠ°āŠŦāŠĨી āŠŪāŠģāŠĪો āŠ°āŠđે āŠ›ે. āŠ†āŠĩી āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨા, āŠœેāŠŪાં āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠķ્āŠĻો āŠđāŠē āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩા āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸ āŠĪંāŠĪ્āŠ°āŠĻે āŠēોāŠ• āŠļāŠđāŠ•ાāŠ° āŠŪāŠģી āŠ°āŠđે āŠ…āŠĻે āŠāŠ• āŠļāŠđીāŠŊાāŠ°ા āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠŊાāŠļ āŠĨāŠ•ી āŠļાāŠŪુāŠđીāŠ• āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊāŠĩાāŠđી āŠĶ્āŠĩાāŠ°ા āŠļāŠ°āŠģāŠĪાં āŠ…āŠĻે āŠļāŠŦāŠģāŠĪા āŠŠુāŠ°્āŠĩāŠ• āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠķ્āŠĻો āŠđāŠē āŠ•āŠ°ી āŠķāŠ•ાāŠŊ, āŠ āŠœ āŠđāŠ•ીāŠ•āŠĪāŠĻા āŠēોāŠ•āŠĪંāŠĪ્āŠ°āŠĻે āŠļાāŠšી āŠ°િāŠĪે āŠ°āŠœુ āŠ•āŠ°ે āŠ›ે. āŠ…āŠđીં āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸી āŠĪંāŠĪ્āŠ° āŠ…āŠĻે āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠœા āŠāŠ•āŠŽીāŠœાāŠĻા āŠĶુāŠļ્āŠŪāŠĻāŠĻી āŠœેāŠŪ āŠĻāŠđીં āŠŠāŠĢ āŠāŠ•āŠŪેāŠ•āŠĻા āŠļāŠđāŠŊોāŠ—ીāŠĻી āŠĶ્āŠ°āŠ·્āŠŸીāŠ āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠđાāŠ° āŠ•āŠ°ે āŠ›ે. āŠ† āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻે āŠļુāŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨિāŠĪ āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠšāŠēાāŠĩāŠĪાં āŠšāŠēાāŠĩāŠĪાં āŠ†āŠœે āŠ•ેāŠ°āŠģ āŠ°ાāŠœāŠŊ āŠļāŠŪāŠ—્āŠ° āŠĶેāŠķāŠŪાં āŠļાāŠŪાāŠĻ્āŠŊ āŠŪાāŠĻāŠĩીāŠĻે āŠœāŠ°ૂāŠ°ી āŠāŠĩા āŠ†āŠ§ાāŠ°āŠ­āŠ­ૂāŠĪ āŠļāŠ°āŠšāŠĻાāŠ“ (āŠ‡āŠĻ્āŠŦ્āŠ°્āŠ°ાāŠļ્āŠŸ્āŠ°āŠ•āŠšāŠ°)āŠĻા āŠ•્āŠ·ેāŠĪ્āŠ°āŠŪાં āŠāŠ• āŠ†āŠšāŠ°āŠĢ āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠŊ āŠ‰āŠĶાāŠđāŠ°āŠĢ āŠŽāŠĻ્āŠŊુ āŠ›ે. āŠœાāŠœāŠ°ૂ-āŠŠેāŠķાāŠŽ āŠŪાāŠŸેāŠĻી āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠŊ āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨાāŠ“, āŠķāŠđેāŠ°āŠŪાં āŠ—ંāŠĶāŠ—ીāŠĻે āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠŊāŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠļાāŠŦ āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩાāŠĻી āŠŠ્āŠ°ાāŠĢીāŠēીāŠ•ાāŠ“, āŠŠાāŠĢી  āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĩીāŠœāŠģીāŠĻા āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠĻે āŠ°ોāŠ•āŠĩા āŠĪેāŠŪāŠœ āŠĪેāŠĻો āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊāŠ•્āŠ·āŠŪ āŠ‰āŠŠāŠŊોāŠ— āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩા āŠŪાāŠŸેāŠĻા āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸી āŠĪંāŠĪ્āŠ°ોāŠĻા āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠŊāŠĪ્āŠĻો āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĶāŠ°ેāŠ• āŠŽાāŠŽāŠĪāŠŪાં āŠĻāŠ—āŠ°āŠœāŠĻોāŠĻો āŠļાāŠĨ āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸ āŠĪંāŠĪ્āŠ°āŠĻે āŠŠુāŠ°ે-āŠŠુāŠ°ો āŠŪāŠģે, āŠĪો āŠĪેāŠĩા āŠ•ીāŠļ્āŠļાāŠŪાં āŠāŠ• āŠĩાāŠ° āŠœāŠ°ૂāŠ° āŠĩિāŠšાāŠ°āŠĩા āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠŊāŠ›ે āŠ•ે, āŠķāŠđેāŠ°āŠĻો āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸ āŠ•ેāŠŸāŠēી āŠŠāŠĶ્āŠ§āŠĪિāŠļāŠ°, āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠŊ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊāŠĶāŠ•્āŠ· āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠĨāŠĪો āŠđāŠķે. āŠĻāŠ—āŠ°āŠœāŠĻોāŠĻો āŠ† āŠļાāŠĨ āŠ•āŠˆ āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠŪāŠģે? āŠ āŠļાāŠĨ āŠĪો āŠœ āŠŪāŠģે, āŠœો āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸી āŠĪંāŠĪ્āŠ° āŠĩિāŠ•ાāŠļāŠĻા āŠŠāŠķ્āŠĻોāŠĻા āŠĻિāŠĩાāŠ°āŠĢ āŠŪાāŠŸે, āŠĻિāŠ°્āŠĢāŠŊ āŠēેāŠĪા āŠŠāŠđેāŠēા āŠœ āŠĻāŠ—āŠ°āŠœāŠĻો āŠĶ્āŠĩાāŠ°ા āŠŽāŠĪાāŠĩāŠĩાāŠŪાં āŠ†āŠĩેāŠē āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠŊ āŠ‰āŠŠાāŠŊો āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ…āŠ­િāŠŠ્āŠ°ાāŠŊોāŠĻે āŠ§્āŠŊાāŠĻāŠŪાં āŠēે āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ›ેāŠ  āŠ…āŠŪāŠēāŠĩાāŠ°ીāŠĻા āŠĪāŠŽāŠ•્āŠ•ા āŠļુāŠ§ી āŠĩોāŠ°્āŠĄ āŠ•āŠ•્āŠ·ાāŠāŠĨી āŠœ āŠĻāŠ—āŠ°āŠœāŠĻો āŠļાāŠĨે āŠ°ાāŠ–ે.
āŠ•ેāŠ°āŠģ āŠ°ાāŠœ્āŠŊ āŠ āŠ†āŠœે āŠļāŠŪāŠ—્āŠ° āŠĩિāŠķ્āŠĩāŠŪાં āŠ•ોāŠ‡ āŠŠāŠĢ āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĻા āŠĶંāŠ­ āŠ•ે āŠŽિāŠĻāŠœāŠ°ૂāŠ°ી āŠĶેāŠ–ાāŠĩ āŠ•āŠ°્āŠŊા āŠĩિāŠĻા āŠāŠ• āŠŸુāŠ°ીāŠāŠŪ āŠđāŠŽ āŠĪāŠ°ીāŠ•ે āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻ āŠŠ્āŠ°ાāŠŠ્āŠĪ āŠ•āŠ°્āŠŊુ āŠ›ે. āŠĪે āŠŪાāŠĪ્āŠ° āŠĪ્āŠŊાāŠĻા āŠ†āŠĩāŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĪાં āŠĻાāŠ—āŠ°ીāŠ•ોāŠĻે āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĢે āŠœ āŠĻāŠĨી āŦŦāŠĢ āŠļાāŠĨે-āŠļાāŠĨે āŠĪ્āŠŊાંāŠĻા āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸી āŠĪંāŠĪ્āŠ°āŠ āŠĻāŠ—āŠ°āŠœાāŠĻોāŠĻા āŠļાāŠĨ āŠĨāŠ•ી, āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĩાāŠļીāŠ“ āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠ†āŠ§ાāŠ°āŠ­ૂāŠĪ āŠļંāŠ°āŠšāŠĻાāŠ“ (āŠˆંāŠŦ્āŠ°ાāŠļ્āŠŸ્āŠ°્āŠ•āŠšāŠ°) āŠ–ુāŠœ āŠœ āŠļુંāŠĶāŠ° āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊāŠĶāŠ•્āŠ· āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠ‰āŠ­ી āŠ•āŠ°ી āŠ†āŠŠી āŠ›ે. āŠ† āŠļāŠŦāŠģāŠĪા āŠŪાāŠĪ્āŠ° āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸ āŠĪંāŠĪ્āŠ°āŠĻા āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠŊાāŠļāŠĨી āŠœ āŠĻāŠđીં, āŠŠāŠĢ āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠœા āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĻāŠ—āŠ°āŠŠાāŠēિāŠ•ાāŠ“āŠĻા āŠļāŠđીāŠŊાāŠ° āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠŊાāŠļāŠĨી-āŠŠāŠŽ્āŠēીāŠ• āŠŠાāŠ°્āŠŸીāŠŠેāŠķāŠĻāŠĻા āŠ…āŠ­િāŠ—āŠŪ  āŠĨી āŠŠ્āŠ°ાāŠŠ્āŠĪ āŠĨāŠˆ āŠ›ે. āŠ•ેāŠ°āŠģāŠĻી āŠļુંāŠĶāŠ°āŠĪા, āŠĪ્āŠŊાંāŠĻી āŠļંāŠļ્āŠ•ૃāŠĪિ āŠ‰āŠŠāŠ°ાંāŠĪ āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĩાāŠļીāŠ“āŠĻે āŠ…āŠĻુāŠ­āŠĩ āŠĨāŠĪાં āŠ†āŠ°ાāŠŪāŠĻો āŠŠāŠĢ āŠ•ેāŠ°āŠģāŠĻા āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĩાāŠļāŠĻāŠĻા āŠĩિāŠ•ાāŠļāŠŪાં āŠŽāŠđુ āŠŪોāŠŸો āŠŦાāŠģો āŠ›ે. āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĩાāŠļીāŠ“āŠĻે āŠĩાāŠ°ંāŠĩાāŠ° āŠ•ેāŠ°āŠģ āŠŦāŠ°āŠĩા āŠœāŠĩાāŠĻી āŠˆāŠš્āŠ›ા āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠ—āŠŸ āŠ•āŠ°ાāŠĩāŠĩાāŠŪાં āŠķāŠđેāŠ°āŠĻી āŠ…ંāŠĶāŠ° āŠંāŠ•āŠĶāŠ°ે āŠ“āŠ›ો āŠ˜ોંāŠ˜ાāŠŸ, āŠ“āŠ›ી āŠ—ંāŠĶāŠ•ી āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ•ુāŠĶāŠ°āŠĪāŠĻા āŠļાāŠĻીāŠ˜્āŠŊāŠŪાં āŠœાāŠĢે āŠķેāŠđāŠ°āŠĻી āŠĩāŠš્āŠšે āŠđોāŠˆāŠ āŠāŠĩા āŠĩાāŠĪાāŠĩāŠ°āŠĢāŠĻું āŠĻિāŠ°્āŠŪાāŠĢ, āŠĪ્āŠŊાંāŠĻા  āŠēોāŠ•ો āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸી āŠĪંāŠĪ્āŠ°āŠĻા āŠšીāŠĩāŠŸ āŠ­āŠ°્āŠŊા āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠŊાāŠļોāŠĻે āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĢે āŠĨāŠˆ āŠķāŠ•āŠŊુ āŠ›ે.
āŠļંāŠļ્āŠ•ૃāŠĪિāŠĪો āŠ•āŠš્āŠ›āŠĻીāŠŊ āŠœāŠŽāŠ°āŠĶāŠļ્āŠĪ āŠ›ે. āŠēોāŠ•ો āŠĪો āŠ•āŠš્āŠ›āŠĻાāŠŊ āŠ…āŠĪિāŠĨિāŠ“āŠĻે āŠļāŠĪ્āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĩાāŠŪાં āŠ•ોāŠ‡āŠĨી āŠ“āŠ›ા āŠ‰āŠĪ્āŠļાāŠđી āŠĻāŠĨી. āŠŠāŠĢ āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĩાāŠļીāŠ“āŠĻે āŠĩાāŠ°ંāŠĩાāŠ° āŠ…āŠđી āŠŦāŠ°āŠĩા āŠ†āŠĩāŠĩા āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠ‰āŠĪ્āŠļુāŠ• āŠ•āŠ°āŠĩા āŠāŠ• āŠ°āŠŪāŠĢીāŠŊ āŠļ્āŠĨāŠģ, āŠāŠ• āŠķાંāŠĪ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ†āŠ°ાāŠŪāŠĻો āŠ…āŠĻુāŠ­āŠĩ āŠ•āŠ°ાāŠĩે āŠĪેāŠĩા āŠķāŠđેāŠ°ોāŠĻે āŠĩિāŠ•āŠļાāŠĩāŠĩાāŠĻી āŠŠāŠĢ āŠĪાāŠĪી āŠœāŠ°ૂāŠ° āŠ›ે. āŠķāŠđેāŠ°āŠĻું āŠŠ્āŠēાāŠĻીંāŠ— āŠāŠ• āŠāŠĩી āŠĩિāŠ°āŠē āŠĩ્āŠŊāŠĩāŠļ્āŠĨા āŠ›ે āŠ•ે āŠœે āŠļāŠĪāŠĪ āŠšાāŠēુ āŠ°āŠđેāŠĪી āŠđોāŠŊ āŠ›ે āŠ…āŠĻે āŠŪાāŠĪ્āŠ° āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸી āŠĪંāŠĪ્āŠ° āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ‰āŠŠāŠ° āŠŽેāŠ ેāŠēા āŠœāŠĻ āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠĪિāŠĻિāŠ˜િāŠ“ āŠ•ે āŠœેāŠŪāŠĻો āŠœāŠŪીāŠĻી āŠļāŠĪ્āŠŊો āŠļાāŠĨેāŠĻો āŠļંāŠŠāŠ°્āŠ• āŠēāŠ—āŠ­āŠ— āŠĪુāŠŸી āŠ—āŠŊો āŠđોāŠŊ āŠ›ે, āŠĪે āŠœ āŠœો āŠķāŠđેāŠ°ોāŠĻા āŠŠ્āŠēાāŠĻિંāŠ—āŠĻું āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊ āŠ†āŠœ āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠ‰āŠŠāŠ°āŠĨી āŠĨોāŠŠāŠĩાāŠĻા āŠ…āŠ­િāŠ—āŠŪāŠĨી āŠ•āŠ°āŠĪાં āŠ°āŠđેāŠķે āŠĪો āŠĪે āŠ•āŠĶાāŠš āŠļંāŠŠુāŠ°્āŠĢ āŠ°āŠŪāŠĢીāŠŊ āŠ•āŠš્āŠ›ી āŠķāŠđેāŠ°ોāŠĻા āŠ āŠļ્āŠĩāŠŠ્āŠĻોāŠĻે āŠ•āŠŊાāŠ°ેāŠŊ āŠŠુāŠ°્āŠĢ āŠĨāŠĩા āŠĶેāŠķે āŠĻāŠđી. āŠœાāŠ—āŠĩા āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠļāŠĩાāŠ° āŠœ āŠœોāŠ‡āŠ āŠĪેāŠĩું āŠœāŠ°ૂāŠ°ી āŠĻāŠĨી. āŠ•āŠđેāŠĩાāŠŊ āŠ›ે āŠ•ે āŠœાāŠ—્āŠŊા āŠĪ્āŠŊાāŠ°āŠĨી āŠļāŠĩાāŠ°, āŠķāŠđેāŠ°āŠĻા āŠŽુāŠ˜્āŠ˜િāŠœીāŠĩી āŠĩāŠ°્āŠ—āŠĻે āŠ…āŠĻે āŠļ્āŠĨાāŠĻિāŠ• āŠĻાāŠ—āŠ°ીāŠ•ોāŠĻે, āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸી āŠĪંāŠĪ્āŠ° āŠĶ્āŠĩાāŠ°ા āŠķેāŠđāŠ°āŠĻા āŠŠ્āŠēાāŠĻીંāŠ— (āŠĻિāŠŊોāŠœāŠĻ) āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸāŠŪાં āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠŊ āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠļાંāŠ•āŠģāŠĩા āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠŊāŠĪ્āŠĻો āŠšાāŠēુ āŠ•āŠ°ી āŠĶેāŠĩાāŠĻી āŠĻેāŠŪ āŠ›ે. āŠŽાāŠ•ી āŠ āŠķāŠŽ્āŠĶો āŠĩિāŠ•ાāŠļ, āŠļૌāŠĨી āŠŠāŠđેāŠēા, āŠļૌāŠĨી āŠŪોāŠŸું āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĩિāŠ•ાāŠļāŠķીāŠēāŠ āŠŽāŠ§ાં āŠŪાāŠŸે āŠŪાāŠĪ્āŠ° āŠāŠŸāŠēું āŠœ āŠ•āŠđેāŠĩાāŠĻું āŠ°āŠđāŠŊું āŠ•ે, āŦŦāŠĄāŠ›ાāŠŊા āŠœો āŠ•āŠĶ āŠ•āŠ°āŠĪાં āŠŪોāŠŸા āŠĶેāŠ–ાāŠĪાં āŠđોāŠŊ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĩાāŠĪો āŠđેāŠļિāŠŊāŠĪ āŠ•āŠ°āŠĪાં āŠŪોāŠŸી āŠĨāŠĩા āŠēાāŠ—āŠĪી āŠđોāŠŊ āŠĪો āŠļāŠŪāŠœāŠĩું āŠ•ે, 'āŠļુāŠ°્āŠŊ' āŠ…āŠļ્āŠĪ āŠĨāŠĩાāŠĻી āŠĪૈāŠŊાāŠ°ીāŠŪાં āŠ›ે, āŠ‰āŠ…āŠ—āŠŪāŠĩાāŠĻીāŠĻāŠđીં! āŠ†āŠĨી āŠĻāŠ—āŠ° āŠĩāŠđીāŠĩāŠŸ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠĻāŠ—āŠ° āŠĻિāŠŊોāŠœāŠĻāŠĻા āŠ•ાāŠ°્āŠŊોāŠŪાં āŠđāŠĩે āŠĻāŠ—āŠ°āŠœāŠĻોāŠĻે āŠŊોāŠ—્āŠŊ āŠ°ીāŠĪે āŠļાંāŠ•āŠģી āŠļ્āŠĩāŠŠāŠĻોāŠĻા āŠķāŠđેāŠ°āŠĻે āŠĻāŠ•્āŠ•āŠ° āŠļ્āŠĩāŠ°ૂāŠŠ āŠ†āŠŠāŠĩાāŠĻો āŠļāŠŪāŠŊ āŠŠાāŠ•ી āŠ—āŠŊો āŠ›ે; āŠĻāŠđીંāŠĪો āŠ•āŠŊાંāŠ• āŠ† āŠāŠ•āŠĩીāŠļāŠŪી āŠļāŠĶીāŠĻા āŠĩૈāŠķ્āŠĩિāŠ• āŠ§āŠŽāŠ•ાāŠ°ાāŠ“ āŠ…āŠĻે āŠ­ુāŠĪāŠ•ાāŠģāŠĻા āŠĶુāŠ°ંāŠĶેāŠķી āŠŪāŠđાāŠŪાāŠĻāŠĩોāŠĻા āŠ•āŠ°્āŠŪāŠ  āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠŊાāŠļોāŠĻે āŠ•ાāŠ°āŠĢે āŠ†āŠŠ āŠŪેāŠģે āŠĩિāŠ•āŠļāŠĪા āŠ­ાāŠ°āŠĪāŠŪાં āŠ•āŠš્āŠ›āŠĻા āŠķāŠđેāŠ°ી āŠœāŠĻો āŠŠાāŠ›āŠģ āŠĻ āŠ°āŠđી āŠœાāŠŊ!

(āŠ† āŠēેāŠ– āŠĶિāŠĩ્āŠŊ āŠ­ાāŠļ્āŠ•āŠ° āŠļāŠŪાāŠšાāŠ° āŠŠāŠĪ્āŠ°āŠŪાં āŠŠ્āŠ°āŠ•āŠķિāŠĪ āŠĨāŠŊો āŠ›ે.)
āŠ­ાāŠ— 1: http://epaper.divyabhaskar.co.in/thumbnail/bhuj/23/07201202/0/1/ )
References:
1. Kerala’s Approach to Tourism Development: A Case Study, 2005 by CRISIL Infrastructure Advisory on behalf of the Ministry of Tourism & Culture, Government of India.
2. Human Development Report 2005 Published by State Planning Board, Government of Kerala.

3. Kerala – A case study of Classical democratic decentralization, 2009 Published by Kerala Institute of Local Administration (KILA), Principal Secretary to Govt. Local Self Government Department Government of Kerala, for submission to the XIIIth finance commission.

Wednesday, 25 March 2015

Hail 'Freedom of Speech' or do hell with it?

Hail 'Freedom of Speech' or do hell with it?

        Now a days, whenever I read newspaper, one may feel a thing very passionately; it is like a churning going on in the country very vehemently about ‘expression’. People are just thriving to express themselves! One may wonder thinking what it is that compels a common man to express. What is it that makes a person express something and that too with urgency greater than the past? Perhaps it is the oppression of the past days which somehow curtailed the right to express in the family and at the family level only. It is an appropriate time to opine on this topic viewing it from the lenses of social system that has rampantly looted by the whims of patriarchal and conservative societal norms. Even today, the youth more or less is compelled to share the old norms not willingly all the time but by force too, and that too many of the times. This opinion writing piece in the context of recent judgment related to section 66A of information Technology (IT) Act 2000.

        Perhaps that completion of old days prompts a person to express a lot once he or she feels comfortable with the mode and medium of expression. That is what the social media platform is- a comfortable space. While using the social media platform, the user is comfortable with ways of expressions that is language and easiness of using the functions available with the social media and the user is comfortable with the audience too. In what sense user is comfortable with audience? A user is sure that after all it would be ended up as social media stuff only. He or she feels a bit sense of being naive and/or care free and/or careless perhaps. It simply means that user is not so serious about the view aired. Now, here is the catch. Since it is not the conviction of a person only that invites or inspires a person to air the views on social media platform, but it is most of the time that sense of (positively or negatively) freedom to be carefree/careless or the comfort that a social media provides to be despotic if one wishes to be. Despotism flourishes in the circumstance of no vigil. And, why is it prevalent? It is prevalent because somehow at the end of lopsided debates and conversations one is always free to and can end up in slander. Immature views usually make the person loose a so called clash of views gently saying debate and/or discussion. And, that is where Socrates words can be felt as the sacred ones for the situation as he once said, “When a debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of a looser!” This is where the story begins in support of the idea and soul of section 66A of the IT Act, 2000 as amended. 

        The text of the section 66A of the IT Act, 2000 is as follows: 
“66A. Punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service, etc.Any person who sends, by means of a computer resource or a communication device,—(a) any information that is grossly offensive or has menacing character; or(b) any information which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred or ill will, persistently by making use of such computer resource or a communication device,(c) any electronic mail or electronic mail message for the purpose of causing annoyance or inconvenience or to deceive or to mislead the addressee or recipient about the origin of such messages,shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine.”
        Reading is carefully, it can simply be understood that the soul of the section indicates towards not tolerating slanderous behaviour using electronic means. Apart from all the flaws highlighted by others about how this section is helping the state to behave like a modern day Nero, one can also give a thought towards its underlying soul. Can’t it be said that this section helps prevent slanderous behaviour? One may think what is so important about ‘slanderous behaviour’? It is the core of any clash in reality. From personal disputes to communal violence, everything revolves around that stupidity emanates out of a seek mind projecting the dirt of inner side by slanderous behaviour. Slanderous behaviour is a grassland of human conduct which can be richly nourished with injecting elements like senses of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred or ill will. 

        And, surveying the society in general, it is easy to find how people are so obsessed with street heckler’s roasting attitude flourishing pampered by sense of despotism growing in the absence of any legitimate vigil. When this situation is coupled with appearance of so called powerful or governing class, the art of ridiculing of a common man simply thrives because of self-developed inferiority! Now imagining a situation where mocking and ridiculing start and it gets explosions of the same just because of reach of social media! What may a human bracketed as ‘powerful’ do to stand by the mocking and ridicule? And, ridiculing and mocking cannot be understood as necessary in any circumstance as per any school of thought of a civilised society. Usually, just because people do not possess proper information about the subject matter they end up not doing legitimate castigation but a splendorous behaviour, ridiculing, mocking etc.; because to do that one needs not to learn it, perhaps our societal values are like that, many learn it at home observing females and poor ones mocked and ridiculed by the ‘powerful’ in his or her eyes like male members of a family. And, that shadow of ridiculing and mocking elders somehow puts an impression on a child that he or she starts growing inferiority about so called ‘powerful’ ones. That inferiority just gets manifestation when she or he is given a platform to voice in the name of freedom but the homework or the legitimate basis to his or her thinking and style of opining is just not provided to him or her just like that! That is where entire concept of ‘giving’ the freedom fails! Freedom cannot be given rather it is to be earned. To earn does not mean you need oppressor all the time to oppose and win the freedom, but to earn means in the time of recent India where you need not oppose colonizers any more but you need to oppose the ‘colonizers’ of your way of life like patriarchy, conservatism, intolerance, in-humanism, pseudo-nationalism etc. Just let not your mind, all the time, find that colonizer in the governing class. The existing leaders and so called powerful are from within us only! They can be castigated severely; it your right, but cannot be ridiculed or mocked since they are humans more than anything else! All these just do not apply to so-called powerful ones, but one may think about anyone who is ridiculed and mocked on social media in this light.

        I ask whether the quashing of this section gives us the ‘right’ to mock or ridicule anyone now using electronic means. Except IPC sections which are very complex, we do not have any other provision to stop and punish this mocking and ridicule? One of my friends suggests almost like ‘social policing’. He suggests that individuals of the society still have the power to shame any ‘offender’ in public. He opines that this method actually works. Showing a bit of sense he draws that the ‘freedom’ ought to be used responsibly; in case of a lapse, the government might be practically toothless, the common man isn't. He simply highlights and gives weight to the ‘enough intellect’ that the common man has to ensure that good sense prevails. This suggestion is more or less proper if one thinks in a faithful manner. But the society is a ‘mass of people’; and masses do not have brains! That is the fact which pushes sensible citizens to worry whether now masses may decide who is ‘offender’ and who is not! Worries get the grave above shadows of the recent events like Dimapur lynching of March 2015 which was the exact case where application of quashed section 66A (b) is totally appropriate, if one may try. It reads: “Any person who sends, by means of a computer resource or a communication device any information which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred or ill will, persistently by making use of such computer resource or a communication device shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine.” But unfortunately we do not have this section anymore, anyway! 

        Well, all these boils down to one question- who will and how will it be decided that who is offender and how will that be prevented from damaging the society? Sensible mind is damn sure that it cannot be masses who will decide. Sincere citizens are sure it cannot be anybody else then the rule of law that can decide it in a democracy! As the honourable Supreme Court of India has categorically opined in the judgment of the case that ‘..there is no manageable standard by which a person can be said to have committed an offence or not to have committed an offence.”, I think we all need to think about working out that sensible and administrable “manageable standard” rather than celebrating this so called attainment of freedom of speech again!

        Decent is no bout the soul of a debate but the digestion power is not the only thing that keeps a human healthy; a human needs to care what is being given to him or her to eat and what should not be eaten and what to do to stop forcefully or amicably receiving it! 

        Chandelier which alights the hall of peace that promotes harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of India transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities and renouncing practices derogatory to the dignity of women (PART IV(A) 51A(e), the Constitution of India) needs a careful handling. The morons of outrageous party culture may hurt the chandelier throwing beer tins and whisky bottles in the air and at the end may give excuse that they are just doing it for fun! We need that chandelier that is celebrated with many glorious diamonds on it of our great past as the nation strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement (PART IV(A) 51A(j), the Constitution of India). 

        And remember, no doubt that, as Margaret Heffernan puts it, ‘for good ideas and true innovation, you need human interaction, conflict, argument, debate’ but we don’t need clashes, ridicule or mocking and riots! It is a critical country where now here and there people just ignore the dictate of Friedrich Nietzsche who once opined that ‘those who cannot understand how to put their thoughts on ice should not enter into the heat of debate.’ Direct or indirect a right to ridicule should not be tolerated in this beautiful country of tehzeeb

        Save the chandelier! Jay Hind!