Why the ‘Valentine Day’ is Becoming Popular in India?

A Sociological Perspective

Coinciding with the emergence of a liberalised economy since the 1980s, Valentine’s Day has become a popular festival in India among urban youth, provoking hostile reactions from some. Instead of passing moral judgment over this festival, it needs to be objectively assessed within larger changes taking place in traditional Indian social life, more particularly the shaky arranged-marriage system.

Evidently, the celebration of the St Valentine’s Day (popularly known as Valentine Day) has almost become a predictable routine in India; cards and gifts are exchanged and  the entire atmosphere becomes radiant with red colour, love, romance  and festivities. However, it is a different matter that most young persons who participate in this gaiety may not be aware of the history and various connotations of this Western festival.1 Nevertheless, the loud celebration of Valentine Day among the urban Indian youth, stubbornly  defying antagonism of the  opponents, requires an explanation. It cannot just be dismissed as an undesirable effect of market economy and capitalistic culture of the West or moral corruption caused by westernisation and globalisation. It is rather symptomatic of changing youth culture all over the world. However, particularly in India, apart from this kind of universalistic trend, it is also indicative of the wide-ranging changes taking place in traditional Indian social life, reflected by growing individualism among youngsters and the shaky arranged marriage system of India.

Not Only in India

Conspicuously, with escalating globalisation, the practice of celebrating  the Valentine Day spread to Asian countries such as Japan,  China, Singapore,  Korea, Philippines, Thailand, Egypt, Iran, Israel, Pakistan,  and  west  Asia. In India also, coinciding with the emergence of liberal economy since the 1980s, Valentine Day has become a popular festival. It has become an occasion mostly for youngsters of urban India to exhibit their feelings of love and affection. The traditional Indian notion that love need not be vulagarised by expressing it overtly is now gradually displaced. Apparently, the youngsters  of urban  India  enthusiastically  articulate  their  feelings  of  love particularly painting  Indian academic campuses  red with fresh roses and sparkling  cards.  Various promotional programmes supported by market-oriented electronic media, the flourishing card business, and growing hospitality industry have not only legitimised it, but have also given an impetus to it.

Predictably, this sudden public outburst of personal sentiments of love gave a jolt to certain sections of Indian society. Particularly, two extremist camps, the leftist radicals on the one hand and the orthodox fanatics on the other condemn this new phenomenon as an undesirable effect of westernisation and globalisaion. The leftists suspect a hidden agenda behind this new “festival of love”, blaming neo-imperialism of the West for sponsoring blatant commercialisation aimed at the emerging Indian middle class. The conservatives, on the other hand, though concur with the radicals regarding the “conspiracy theory” of the West behind this love carnival, differ in their indictment. They despise the cultural pollution being fuelled by alien forces allegedly destroying traditional Indian culture and morally corrupting the Indian youth. Orthodox forces spearheaded by the Hindu and Islamic fanatics, being more aggressive and violent in their   protest,   often raid card shops and attack the love-intoxicated young people.2

However, such hasty value judgments, particularly in India, need to be objectively scrutinised in the specific context of changing Indian society. For, of late, in addition  to the  Valentine Day, other cultural  innovations  such  as New Year Eve festivity on 31 December,  or jubilation  on Friendship  Day or euphoria  on Rose  Day  are   also   in  vogue   mostly among  the  urban  youth.3   Even the  increasingly noisy celebrations of traditional Indian festivals like Navratri, Ganeshotsav,  or Gokulashtami  are  often contrary  to the sentiments traditionally associated with these religious events. Nonetheless,  for the younger generation all these occasions have acquired  a new meaning,   providing  an  opportunity to hang  out  and  mingle  with  their  peers, often signifying their urge to be noticed and to be connected.

Traditional Indian society, based on agricultural economy and primordial institutions like joint family, kinship, caste, and village community has been radically changing with the exposure to modernising forces. The emergent modern values of individualism, freedom, liberty, equality, and secularism and the accompanying processes of competition, consumerism, industrial capitalism, large-scale migration, and urbanisation have diminished the importance of those traditional institutions. Due to enhanced industrialisation and concomitant rural- urban migration there has been a steady rise in the urban population of India. The urban population in India has gone up gradually from about 11% in 1901 to 17% in 1951 and then to  28% in  2001 (Kundu 2011: 8). In 2011 it has grown to 31% (Census 2011).

As a result, an urban society privileging privacy and anonymity is growing, which has weakened traditional social bonds and authority structures based on village, caste and kinship.  The scarcity of housing  facilities in urban  areas  not only increases  the  cost of housing,  but also constricts the size of dwellings, compelling  the  urban  middle  class  to live in nuclear families.

Further, the high cost of basic urban amenities such as transport, education, and health services, oblige both the husband and wife to earn.  Enhanced employment   opportunities for women   in cities augment this process.  Obviously, the traditional institutions of family and kinship have crumbled, weakening conventional mechanisms of social control and making the long-established custom of arranged marriages   unsustainable. Not surprisingly, the Valentine Day is relatively much more popular in urban centres than in rural India.

Traditionally, when village life was throbbing, kinship was vibrant, caste was influential, and customary match- makers were helpful, the arranged marriage was the time-honoured practice. The  village  elders,  schoolteachers, senior  relatives,  Nais, and  the  Brahmins used  to locate  a suitable  match  for the grown-up  children  of the  village. Such marriages were mostly held within the limits prescribed by caste norms regarding endogamy and exogamy (Uberoi 1993). Besides, they were considered desirable too in view of the social solidarity of the traditional communities (Gupta 1976). Now, however, the dispersal of families, due to migration, has not only weakened family  and kinship  ties  but  has  also made the role of traditional matchmakers redundant and  the  custom  of arranged marriage unsuitable.

Times They Are Changing …

The alternative social innovations such as brief and awkward “interviews” of prospective marital candidates, matrimonial  advertisements in print media, directories of eligible bachelors published by caste associations, so-called marriage melas,  ironically also known as swayamvaram, and marriage-related websites have emerged as functional substitutes to traditional matchmakers. However, the young generation, born and brought up in modernising India, craves for personal space in these highly personal matters like the choice of spouse, find such mechanisms not very satisfying. And, the institution of dating, functioning effectively in the highly individualistic societies of the West, has not been institutionalised in India.

Yet, marriage is an inevitable stage in the normal lives of most grown-up young men and women. Hence, youngsters find the Valentine Day, New Year Eve, Friendship Day, Rose Day, as appropriate occasions to look for friends and life partners. Admittedly, in every society, festivities have a tension-releasing function allowing the participants to transgress the limits of routine life. However, in the absence of institutionalisation of norms regarding “proper” behaviour on such junctures young boys and girls, at times, go haywire and often wreak havoc with their own lives. Their deviant behaviour thus provides a lever in the hands of self-appointed moral police to hit them hard, accusing them of blindly imitating alien cultures when it comes to Valentine Day celebration or some such western practices. Nevertheless, the same people ignore the uproarious conduct of the youth on the tradi- tional Indian festivals, like Navratri or Ganesh Chaturthi or Gokulashtami, which also have almost the same function of sociability for the urban youth.

Apparently, it is now impossible to revert to the safety net of traditional institutions. Gupta (1976: 83), who found strong empirical evidence in support of arranged marriage   in his study,   also noted that in the long-run romantic ideal will prevail. Therefore, the only option left to contemporary Indian society is to allow the young some space in their private life, if necessary,  guiding  and counseling  them regarding  proper con- duct on such occasions and evolving proper ways of chaperoning  them  so that  they  can be protecting  them  from devastatingly self-destructive  actions

Thus, celebration of the Valentine Day and all such festivals has a communicative function. Message communicated by the urban Indian youth is: such innovative festivities need not be perceived as a problem, but as a solution to the problem of vanishing institutions of arranged marriage  in India, along with other traditional practices.

Notes

1      Although there is no single authentic version of its origin, the Valentine Day in the current form has become popular in the west only in the modern   times.  And there  are  significant  regional variations  including  the date  and manner  of its celebration. See (i)  DeSousa,  Katie (2013), “Where Did Saint Valentine’s Day Come from Anyway?”,  viewed on 19 December 201302/where-did-saint-valentines-day-come-from- anyway/),  (ii)  Dyk, Natalie  Van (2013),  “The Reconceptualisation of Valentine’s  Day in the United   States:   Valentine’s  Day  as  a  Phenomenon of Popular Culture”, Bridges: An Under- graduate Journal of Contemporary Connections,1(1), viewed   on  19  December   2013  (http://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=bridges_contempoy _connections),  (iii) Haag, Pamela (2013), “Valentine Day: Its Gory, Unromantic  Secret History”,  viewed on  19  December  2013  (http://bigthink.com/ harpys-review/valentines-day-its-gory-unromantic-secret-history),  and   (iv)   “Valentine’s Day”, Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia,  visited on  19  December   2013   (http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/ Valentine’s_Day).

2    Of course, such sentiments are expressed elsewhere also. See (i) Glazov, Jamie (2010), “Hating Valentine’s”, viewed on 23 December  2013 (http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jamie- glazov/hating-valentine%     E2%    80%99s/), (ii)  “Valentine’s Day for All: A Marxist Defense of the Romantic Day”, viewed on 23 December 2013 (http://thevarsity.ca/2012/02/13/valen- tines-day-for-all/), and (iii) (a) “Fatwas of Muslim Scholars Concerning  Valentine’s Day”, viewed on 26  December 2013 (http://www.is- lamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page = articles &id=156435); also see (b)  (http://jami- abinoria.org/months/valentine&islam.htm).

3    Lately, the Indian youth also have adopted the “Friendship Day” as a festival.  See (i) http:// www.friendshipday.org/when-is-friendship-day html, and (2) http://www.timeanddate.com/ holidays/india/friendship-day, viewed on 30 December 2013. According to some reports an elaborate tradition of celebration of Valentine Week has been built up beginning with 7 February, which is celebrated as the Rose Day and marks   the commencement of  the  Valentine Week followed by  8 February:  Propose Day, 9 February:  Chocolate Day, 10  February:  Teddy Day, 11  February:  Promise  Day, 12 February: Hug Day, 13 February:  Kiss Day, and 14 February:   the   grand   finale;   Valentine   Day.  See: http://news.oneindia.in/2011/02/07/rose-day- marks-the-start-of-valentine-week-2011- aid0116.html (viewed on 30 December 2013).

References

Census (2011): Rural Urban Distribution of Popula- tion, Census  of  India  (New  Delhi:  Ministry Home Affairs), viewed on 12 January 2014, http://censusindia. gov.in/2011-prov results/ paper2/data_files/india/Rural_Urban_2011.pdf

Gupta, Giri Raj (1976): “Love, Arranged Marriage and the Indian  Social  Structure”, Journal  of Comparative Family Studies, 7(1), 75-85.

Kundu,  Amitabh  (2011):  Trends  and  Processes of Urbanisation in India (London:  Human  Settlements  Group  International Institute for Environment and Development  and New York: Population and Development  Branch United Nations Population Fund).

Uberoi, Patricia, ed.  (1993):  Family, Kinship and Marriage in India (Delhi: Oxford University Press).

*****

Pravin J Patel (pravin1943@gmail.com) is a sociologist, formerly with M S University, Baroda and vice chancellor of Sardar Patel University, Gujarat. The article was originally published in Economic and Political Weekly, May 10, 2014, Vol.XLIX No 19, PP.19-21.

After Narendra Modi's recent meeting with Barack Obama, there was some criticism of his wearing a suit whosestripes spelt out his own name. The criticism was not unmerited; it was a tawdry, tacky, thing to do. Yet Modi's expensive display of self-love was entirely characteristic of how powerful and successful Indian males tend to behave in public.

Consider this. India's most famous and highly decorated scientist is C.N.R. Rao, a Fellow of the world's most prestigious scientific academies, and a recipient of his country's highest honour, the Bharat Ratna. Some years ago, an admirer decided to lobby the Bangalore Municipality to name the circle outside the Indian Institute of Science (of which Rao had been director) after the great man. Now circles and roads are normally not named after living people. But here was C.N.R. Rao in the flesh, actually present when a circle named after him was being inaugurated.

Next only to Rao in the hierarchy of Indian science is R.A. Mashelkar. Mashelkar is a former director general of the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, a Fellow of the Royal Society, and much else. He has not, so far as I know, had a circle or building named after himself. Yet his conduct in public is scarcely less boastful, as witness his editorial in a recent issue of the journal, Current Science. Entitled '"Indovation" for affordable excellence', it is mostly about the author himself. In a mere couple of pages we are told of a paper by Mashelkar in the Harvard Business Review which "provoked worldwide discussion" and was the subject of a "special session" at the World Economic Forum; that a TED lecture he gave "has received more than half a million views and has been subtitled in 23 languages"; that Mashelkar is the president of something called the Global Research Alliance; that the European Union invited him to give a talk to "an audience of around 2000"; that when he was director general of the CSIR he set up "a public-private partnership called New Millennium Indian Technology Leadership Initiative".

Mashelkar's article runs so contrary to the spirit of science that I wonder how it was accepted for publication. How did the editor of Current Science allow the essay to pass without major cuts and changes? Either the editor is plain incompetent, or, what is more likely, too intimidated by Mashelkar's reputation and influence to have asked him to revise his essay.

Founded by C.V. Raman, Current Science is modelled on the American journal, Science, and the British journal, Nature. Like them, it publishes original scientific papers as well as shorter commentaries, book reviews, and obituaries. But one would never find in Nature or Science editorials remotely as self-promoting as this. As he was crafting his essay, did Mashelkar not realize that this was not a self-written Wikipedia entry or a funding application but in fact a scholarly editorial in what is presumed to be the flagship journal of a nation's scientific community? Reading Mashelkar's editorial in Current Science, I was reminded of a story involving the great British-born biologist, J.B.S. Haldane. In the 1950s, Haldane embraced Indian citizenship, and set up a laboratory at the Indian Statistical Institute in Calcutta. One of his students bored him with stories about his impending marriage, his family lineage, and his own academic record. At last Haldane held up a hand, and remarked: "You only talk about yourself.

But science begins with an interest in the world outside yourself." To be sure, not all Indian scientists are as boastful as Rao or Mashelkar. One of my own intellectual heroes is the late Obaid Siddiqi, who founded theNational Centre for Biological Sciences, arguably India's most high quality scientific laboratory. Siddiqi, who combined intellectual brilliance with personal rectitude, recruited a team of gifted young scientists and then left them the institute to run. He nurtured an atmosphere of egalitarianism in the NCBS, where juniors could fearlessly challenge seniors and where honorifics such as 'Sir', 'Professor'. were rigorously eschewed. Sadly, not many Indian scientists are cut of the same cloth as Obaid Siddiqi. In their youth, C.N.R. Rao and R.A. Mashelkar undoubtedly did first-rate scientific work. But, rather than allow younger people to take over scientific leadership as they themselves grew older, they consolidated their own position and power. Worse still, they encouraged flattery and chamchagiri, as manifested most spectacularly in Rao allowing a circle to be named after him.

Where our scientists go, our social scientists can scarcely be far behind. Consider the conduct in this regard of the two most influential economists of Indian extraction, Jagdish Bhagwati and Amartya Sen. Educated Indians know their names, and know also that they have been involved in a long-running debate about economic policy. Bhagwati is a proponent of the free market, and of opening out the economy to foreign investment and foreign competition. Sen thinks that distribution is as important as growth, and places greater emphasis on the role of the State in nurturing human capital. At the level of political influence, Sen was highly regarded by Sonia Gandhi and her National Advisory Council, whereas Bhagwati is much admired by Narendra Modi.

These intellectual and ideological differences have led to the construction of Bhagwati and Sen as rivals and adversaries. But there is one thing that unites Bhagwati and Sen- both are still living, and yet both, like the scientist C.N.R. Rao, have had things named after themselves. Bhagwati has taught for many years at Columbia University, which now has a Jagdish Bhagwati Chair in Political Economy, occupied by Bhagwati's co-author and protege, Arvind Panagriya. Meanwhile, the Indian Council of Social Science Research has endowed annual Amartya Sen Prizes for Excellence, these handed out at a ceremony presided over by Amartya Sen himself.

B.R. Ambedkar famously said that hero-worship is antithetical to the democratic spirit. This is true in politics, and perhaps even more so in the sphere of science. Respect for senior scholars for what they have achieved is fine; but when respect shades into deference and even reverence, it is not conducive to independent and original thinking. No wonder that Indian universities and research institutions lag so far behind in global rankings.

While drafting this column, I was discussing its argument with a friend, who asked whether, like C.N.R. Rao, the cricketer Anil Kumble was present at the naming of a circle after him in Bangalore. I answered that I did not know, but in any case one did not hold sportsmen to the ethical or aesthetic standards that scholars or scientists were supposed to adhere to. One of Jagdish Bhagwati's own close friends and former colleagues is Robert Solow. When Solow (arguably the world's greatest living economist) was teaching at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, did someone else at the MIT hold the Robert Solow Chair in Political Economy? Like Amartya Sen, Martin Rees was once Master of Trinity College, Cambridge. But does that distinguished British astronomer annually hand out Martin Rees Prizes for Scientific Excellence? These were -are -the pertinent questions, and I suspect that in each case the answer is "No".

In allowing (or encouraging) things to be named after themselves, C.N.R. Rao, Amartya Sen and Jagdish Bhagwati have not done anything that is illegal. What they have done is not even immoral. But it is unquestionably in poor taste.

Which brings me back to Narendra Modi and the suit he wore with his own name on it. In societies whose spirit and form are egalitarian, or where the aesthetic ethos is one of refined understatement, what he did would be completely out of place. But in a country where hero worship is so ubiquitous, where the vanity of the powerful and the famous is so staggeringly large, it was an entirely normal thing to do. When India's top scholars and scientists are so flagrantly narcissistic, one must not be too harsh on a self-made, semi-educated, political leader for being so.

(Source: The Telegraph)

(Ramachandra Guha is a historian, biographer, author of, among other books, Gandhi before India, A Corner of a Foreign Field: The Indian history of a British sport and India after Gandhi: The History of the World's Largest Democracy.)

http://www.ndtv.com/opinion/the-staggering-vanity-of-indias-powerful-737618?pfrom=home-topstories

મહાત્મા ગાંધીએ પોતાની આત્મકથા 'સત્યના પ્રયોગો'ના ચોથા ભાગના ૧૮માં પ્રકરણ 'એક પુસ્તકની જાદુઈ અસર'માં લખ્યું છે, "આ પુસ્તકને લીધા પછી હું છોડી જ ન શક્યો. તેણે મને પકડી લીધો. જોહાનિસબર્ગથી નાતાલ ચોવીસ કલાક જેટલો રસ્તો હતો. ટ્રેન સાંજે ડરબન પહોંચતી હતી. પહોંચ્યા પછી આખી રાત ઊંઘ ન આવી. પુસ્તકમાં સૂચવેલા વિચારો અમલમાં મૂકવાનો ઈરાદો કર્યો … આજ લગી પણ એમ જ કહેવાય કે મારું પુસ્તકોનું જ્ઞાન ઘણું જ થોડું છે … પણ જે થોડાં પુસ્તકો વાંચ્યાં છે, તેને હું ઠીક પચાવી શક્યો છું એમ કહી શકાય. એવાં પુસ્તકોમાં જેણે મારી જિંદગીમાં તત્કાળ મહત્ત્વનો રચનાત્મક ફેરફાર કરાવ્યો, એવું આ પુસ્તક જ કહેવાય." આ પુસ્તક એટલે જ્હોન રસ્કિનનું 'અન ટુ ધિસ લાસ્ટ'. મહાત્મા ગાંધી પર આ પુસ્તકની જાદુઈ અસર થઈ હતી. તેમણે આ પુસ્તકનો અનુવાદ કરીને દક્ષિણ આફ્રિકાથી પ્રકાશિત થતા 'ઇન્ડિયન ઓપિનિયન'માં તેનો સાર આપ્યો હતો, જેની 'સર્વોદય' નામે પુસ્તિકા પણ તૈયાર થઈ હતી. ગાંધીજીએ આ પુસ્તકનો માત્ર અનુવાદ જ નહોતો કર્યો પરંતુ તેનું તાત્કાલિક ધોરણે અનુકરણ શરૂ કરી દીધું હતું અને ફિનિક્સ આશ્રમમાં મજૂર-ખેડૂત જેવું જીવન જીવવાનું શરૂ કરેલું.

૮ ફેબ્રુઆરી, ૧૮૧૯ના રોજ જન્મેલા જ્હોન રસ્કિનનો આજે જન્મ દિવસ છે. હાલમાં સમગ્ર દેશમાં ગાંધીજીની વતન-વાપસીની શતાબ્દીનું વર્ષ ઊજવાઈ રહ્યું છે, કારણ કે વિદેશ ગયેલા મોહનદાસ મહાત્મા બનીને દેશમાં પાછા ફર્યા હતા અને અહિંસક આંદોલન થકી દેશને આઝાદી અપાવી હતી. મોહનદાસને વિદેશની ધરતી પર મહાત્મા બનાવનારાં અનેક પરિબળોમાં સૌથી મોટો ફાળો જ્હોન રસ્કિનના 'અન ટુ ધિસ લાસ્ટ' પુસ્તકનો પણ ગણવો જ રહ્યો. ગાંધીજીએ રસ્કિનને પોતાના ગુરુ ગણાવ્યા હતા. રસ્કિનની જન્મ જયંતી નિમિત્તે તેમના 'જાદુઈ' વિચારો જાણીએ …

ચિત્રકાર અને કલાકાર એવા જ્હોન રસ્કિન કોઈ અર્થશાસ્ત્રી નહોતા, પણ તેઓ એક વિચારક હતા, દાર્શનિક હતા. લાગણી, માનવજીવનનાં મૂલ્યો, ધાર્મિક સદ્ગુણો વગેરેને ચાતરીને ચાલતું અર્થશાસ્ત્ર તેમને મંજૂર નહોતું. પશ્ચિમનું અર્થશાસ્ત્ર જ્યારે વધુ લોકોના હિતની વાતો કરીને સમાજના કેટલાક વર્ગનાં હિતોની અવગણનાને યોગ્ય ઠેરવતું હતું ત્યારે રસ્કિને પોતાના પ્રખર વિચારો દ્વારા ભલભલા અર્થશાસ્ત્રીઓની બોલતી બંધ કરી દીધી હતી. રસ્કિને તે વખતે આર્થિક અસમાનતામાં સબડતા સમાજને જોઈને ચિત્કાર કરેલો, "જોનારને લાગે કે આ તો સંપત્તિ એકઠી થઈ રહી છે, પણ હોય છે એ તો લાંબા ગાળા સુધી પથરાયેલા વિનાશની કેવળ પારાશીશી. એનો ચળકાટ નકલી છે. મુઠ્ઠીભર સિક્કા માટે તે કપટ કરાવે છે. ખરેખર તો એ છેતરામણી દોજખ જેવી ખતરનાક ખાડી છે. ત્યાં સંપત્તિથી ભર્યું વહાણ ભાંગીને ભુક્કો થઈ જાય છે. મરણ પામતા સૈનિકોનાં કપડાં ખેંચી લેવા જેવી સંપત્તિ એ છે. એ તો માનવ અને માનવતા બન્નેને દફનાવતી ખાઈ છે." તેમના મુજબ તો "આજના અર્થશાસ્ત્રીની રીતે તમારી જાતને ધનવાન બનાવવાની જે કલા છે તે તમારા પાડોશીને ગરીબ રાખવાની કલા પણ છે."

મૂડીવાદી અર્થવ્યવસ્થામાં મૂડી જ કેન્દ્રસ્થાને હોય છે ત્યારે મૂડીપતિઓના હિતનું પોષણ અને મજૂરોનું શોષણ કરવામાં આવતું હોય છે. આ અંગે રસ્કિને લખ્યું છે, "માણસની લાચારી અને ગરજનો લાભ ઉઠાવીને તેની મજૂરી, તેનો શ્રમ, તેનાં માલમિલકત ઓછા ભાવે લેવાં તેનું નામ વેપાર ગણાય છે. સામાન્ય ચોર, ડાકુ કરતાં ઊલટી લૂંટ થઈ. એ કંગાળ છે અને તેથી શાહુકાર-શેઠને લૂંટે છે. જ્યારે અહીં તો આ શાહુકાર-શેઠ પોતે ધનિક છે તેથી લૂંટે છે."

આજે શહેરોમાં લૂંટફાટ સહિતના ક્રાઇમ વધ્યા છે તો બીજી તરફ ગ્રામીણ વિસ્તારોમાં નકસલવાદે નાકે દમ લાવી દીધો છે. સમગ્ર વિશ્વ આતંકવાદ અને મંદી સામે ઝઝૂમી રહ્યું છે અને શાંતિની ઝંખના કરી રહ્યું છે ત્યારે રસ્કિનના આ શબ્દો ભીંત પણ કોતરી રાખવા જેવા છે ઃ "શાંતિ અને ન્યાય એકબીજાનાં સહોદર છે. શાંતિ માટેની ઝંખના સેવનારને હાથે જ ન્યાયની વ્યવસ્થાનાં બીજ રોપાય છે. એવી શાંતિ સ્થાપનાનું આ કામ તો શાંતિનો બંદોબસ્ત રાખનારાને આધારે થઈ શકશે નહીં. તે તો જાતે પોતાની અંદર પામવાની શાંતિ છે … કોઈ ધંધાદારી નિયમો વડે એ પામી શકાતી."

આતંકવાદ અને અંધાધૂંધી પાછળ સામાજિક-રાજકીય-આર્થિક વ્યવસ્થાને કારણે સર્જાતો અન્યાય જવાબદાર છે. રસ્કિને દોઢસો વર્ષ પહેલાં ન્યાયની બાબતે કંઈક આવી ફરિયાદ કરેલી, "ભલભલા પેઢી દર પેઢી સતત એક ભૂલ કરતા જ રહે છે. ગરીબને ભીખ વડે રાહતની મદદ કરવાની, તેને આશ્વાસન વડે આશા અને ધીરજ ધરવાની ઠાવકી શીખ આપવાની ભૂલ તે કરતા જ રહે છે. અન્ય તમામ ચીજ તે આપતા જાય છે, પણ ઈશ્વરે તેમને માટે આદેશપૂર્વક નિર્ધારિત કરેલી એક જ ચીજ એ તેમને આપતા નથી, અને એ ચીજ તે છે, ન્યાય." રસ્કિને ન્યાયના સંદર્ભે પ્રેમની સુંદર વ્યાખ્યા આપેલી છે, "પ્રેમ એટલે ખાલી લાગણીવશતાની વાત નથી. એ તો તમામ વ્યવહારમાં ન્યાય સચવાય તેમાં રહેલો છે, ન્યાયને જ પસંદ કરવામાં અને તેને જ મોખરે રાખવામાં એ સમાયેલો છે."

e.mail : divyeshvyas.amd@gmail.com

સૌજન્ય : ‘સમય-સંકેત’ નામે લેખકની કટાર, “સંદેશ”, 08 ફેબ્રુઆરી 2015

http://sandesh.com/article.aspx?newsid=3040144