Anil Vij Urges Youth to Limit Screen Time, Announces Rs 12.5 Lakh Grant for Meritorious Students
AMBALA:
Haryana's cabinet minister for power, transport and labour, Anil Vij, expressed serious concern over the growing obsession of the younger generation with mobile phones, televisions, and computers.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
Speaking at the 'Bhavishya Jyoti Samaroh' organized by a national daily to honor meritorious students from Ambala district, Vij urged youth to limit screen time in order to preserve mental and physical well-being.
Addressing a gathering as the chief guest, Vij said, 'Today, people spend most of their time watching the world through TV screens, reacting to what they see. The younger generation is getting lost in mobile phones and digital screens.
If we truly want to reform our youth, we must begin by encouraging them to use mobile phones and TVs sparingly.'
At the event, minister Vij honored 125 top-performing students from various schools in the district. He also announced a personal donation of Rs 12.5 lakh from his voluntary fund, pledging Rs 10,000 to each of the recognized students as a gesture of support for their academic excellence.
Highlighting both the pros and cons of technology, Vij said, 'Technology has made our society more aware and connected, but it has also distanced us from each other.
In earlier times, people would gather in their neighborhoods and engage in conversations. That spirit of community is fading.'
He emphasized the need for society-builders and mentors who can help shape the character of the youth. 'We need individuals who can guide the next generation toward a life of purpose and value,' he added.
Stressing the adverse impact of excessive mobile phone use, Vij noted its harmful effects on mental health.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
'The brain is constantly running, and continuous screen exposure is weakening our cognitive strength. We must adapt to technology, but also maintain a healthy distance from it,' he said.
Quoting the ancient Sanskrit saying 'Tamso Ma Jyotirgamaya' (Lead me from darkness to light), Vij underlined the importance of moving from ignorance to knowledge. He reminisced about his own student days, when learning was confined to schoolbooks and long hours in the state library.
'In our times, we didn't have mobile phones or internet. We relied on books and deep reading to gain knowledge, but today, access to knowledge is unlimited.
Still, the desire to learn must come from within.'
Calling the felicitation of students a noble initiative, Vij appreciated the role of media houses in recognizing young talent and contributing to social change. 'Every individual has some unique talent or capability.
Success is a combination of ability and opportunity. Without opportunities, even the most capable person's talent may remain undiscovered.'
He lauded newspapers as the mirror of society and praised the organizing media outlet for its contribution to education and community welfare. 'The word 'NEWS' itself represents North, East, West, and South – a reflection of what's happening all around us. It is the responsibility of newspapers to present the truth and shape public thought. Amar Ujala is doing commendable work in this direction,' he remarked.
The ceremony was attended by hundreds of students, their parents, and local dignitaries.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
5 hours ago
- The Print
India's all-party delegations show a problem with our embassies
Governments regularly send foreign affairs ministers or senior officials to convey important and special messages. But the use of all-party parliamentary delegations is a rare practice in diplomacy. I cannot recall any recent example of a country taking such a step. That such delegations were needed to convey India's position on terrorism reflects the limitations of Indian missions abroad in performing this task effectively. My view is that the government was compelled to send these delegations because Indian missions abroad are unable to aggressively promote India's national interests. The decision of the Modi government to send all-party parliamentary delegations to different countries for mobilising support against terrorism, following the ceasefire with Pakistan, has attracted significant public attention. As these delegations are reaching various countries, questions are being raised about why such a step was necessary in the first place. This situation can be attributed to two interrelated factors. One is that successive governments have failed to carry out necessary reforms in the Indian missions abroad. The other is that officials working in Indian embassies get little public recognition back home, which impacts their performance. As a result, the government has to resort to temporary mechanisms such as sending all-party delegations. However, the long-term solution lies in the structural reform of India's missions abroad. Also Read: Sanskrit to satellites, embassies in Delhi are using culture to show ties, get close to India Decolonising the structure of Indian embassies The Indian missions abroad, called high commissions in Commonwealth countries and embassies in others, are primarily responsible for conveying the message of the Indian government. Increasing the efficiency of these missions is crucial, but unfortunately, successive governments have not paid any attention in this regard. Reforms are needed in two directions—decolonisation of the structure of Indian embassies, and the promotion of active over passive leadership. First, the structure of Indian embassies. For example, the Indian High Commission in London still seems to be organised along colonial lines. Presently, six of its officials are designated as ministers. They are minister (counsellor), minister (audit), minister (economic), minister (coordination), and minister (Nehru Centre). Interestingly, the designation of minister is not used by the Indian High Commissions in Australia, New Zealand, or Canada. And only India, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh have this designation in their London-based high commissions. This practice appears to have been inherited from the office of the Secretary of India during colonial rule. While the positions of secretary and deputy secretary may have been replaced with High Commissioner and Deputy High Commissioner, the remaining designations are unchanged. The designation of minister also creates confusion when Union or state ministers officially visit London. Usually, the embassy 'ministers' receive and accompany them. It causes great confusion for those unfamiliar with the bureaucratic hierarchy. The second issue relates to leadership style. The government needs to ensure that Indian embassies show active rather than passive leadership. Presently, embassies tend to act only after receiving instructions from the government, and their engagement remains very formal. However, they need to be encouraged to engage with the Indian diaspora and other stakeholders informally. Based on my six years of experience in London, I have noticed that purely bureaucratic appointments reduce such engagement. Therefore, the government needs to diversify its officials in Indian missions. It should incorporate professors, journalists, writers, and other young leaders into the pool. I have found, for instance, that the appointment of Amish Tripathi as the Chair of the Nehru Centre in London significantly increased social activities. The centre acts as the cultural wing of the Indian High Commission in London, and it emerged as a premier institution engaged in India's cultural interface with the UK. Coming from a literary background, Tripathi, who served until October 2023, did not concern himself with bureaucratic protocols and met people both formally and informally. This led to a rise in cultural activities and social gatherings at the Nehru Centre. The appointment of diverse professionals in Indian missions abroad is needed for two further reasons. First, the missions increasingly need to engage with the Indian diaspora, which is itself diverse in terms of region, ideology, caste, and profession. A broader mix of professionals in missions will improve outreach. Second, the appointment of diverse professionals will provide them with exposure to foreign policy and diplomacy, which would be beneficial for developing future leaders. Also Read: Countering Pakistan isn't India's only challenge. We need doctrinal clarity on China factor The problem of invisibility The lack of public recognition for the good work done in Indian embassies also discourages officials from showing active leadership. For example, the current Indian High Commissioner in London, Vikram Doraiswami, is the most active one I have seen in comparison with his predecessors. He frequently meets people and actively participates in community events. Yet most Indians would not know his name. Similarly, the security officer of the Commission, Kiran Bhosale, was injured while protecting the Tricolour during a Khalistan protest in 2023. Yet this news found no space in the media. All of these point to a lack of recognition for the work being done in the Indian mission. This too acts as a disincentive to active leadership. To sum up, decolonising Indian missions, promoting active leadership through professional diversification, and increasing recognition for officials would go a long way in making embassies better equipped to fulfil the role they were set up for. Arvind Kumar is a Visiting Lecturer in Politics & International Relations at the University of Hertfordshire, UK. He tweets @arvind_kumar__. Views are personal. (Edited by Asavari Singh)
News18
a day ago
- News18
Kamal Haasan's Linguistic Gaffe: Popularity Of Language Not Gauged By Antiquity But Usage
Last Updated: The debate over superiority of a particular language smacks of wastefulness and futility. Language and art are no longer tested on the touchstone of antiquity and provenance India recognises 11 languages as classical languages: Tamil, Sanskrit, Kannada, Telugu, Malayalam, Odia, Marathi, Pali, Prakrit, Assamese, and Bengali. These languages are acknowledged for their rich literary and historical heritage, with some dating back over 1,500 to 2,000 years. The initial six were Tamil (2004), Sanskrit (2005), Kannada (2008), Telugu (2008), Malayalam (2013), and Odia (2014). On October 4, 2024, the Union cabinet added the remaining five to the exalted status. Curiously, Hindi doesn't figure in the list of classical languages. We don't have to look too far to find the reason. After all, Hindi is spoken in several dialects. Bhojpuri, Brij, Maithili and so forth. So, it is possible the government is still examining the antiquity and heritage of each of the Hindi dialects. Punjabi, too, doesn't figure in the list but that doesn't raise the hackles of Punjabis who revel in and celebrate the flippancy and bluff lightness of the language. The redoubtable Rajaji, famed for his foresightedness and intelligence, committed about 55 years ago the same error as Kamal Haasan – Kannada came out of the womb of Tamil. He, too, had hailed Tamil as the mother of Kannada. He post-haste tendered his apology for his insensitive utterance. Language and rivers have the knack of sowing seeds of dissension. The historical English-French rivalry harks back to the Norman Conquest of 1066 and subsequent Plantagenet rule, which led to French becoming the language of the English court and aristocracy, profoundly impacting the English language. This influence, while substantial, also fostered a sense of national identity that stood away from the French, contributing to a rivalry that extended beyond language. When one thinks dispassionately, the debate over superiority of a particular language smacks of wastefulness and futility. As wasteful and futile as trying to decipher the provenance of an art especially in the light of the modern trend to celebrate impressionist art as well in equal measure. On March 21, 2006, Twitter founder Jack Dorsey registered his first tweet, which read: 'Just setting up my twttr". This was the inaugural post on the platform, which was then internally codenamed 'twttr". The first tweet was later sold as a non-fungible token (NFT) and fetched a price of $2.9 million. To the art purists, NFT may be the ultimate in the dumbing down of art. Be that as it may. The point is language and art are no longer tested on the touchstone of antiquity and provenance. Coming back to Haasan's seeming gaffe, well he might have done it deliberately to cozy up to the present ruling dispensation in Tamil Nadu. At least the timing suggests that – hints of his impending nomination to the Rajya Sabha by the DMK government and his rash comment have almost coincided. That he implicitly denounced the other language while sharing the podium with Shivarajkumar, the son of late Dr Rajkumar – the Kannada matinee idol – is both cheeky and surprising given the fact Shivarajkumar sprang to Haasan's defence though not then and there. People are also questioning Shivarajkumar, who did not counter Haasan on the stage. They argue that Kannada is an independent Dravidian language like Tamil and other languages. Maybe he was overawed by the seniority and popularity of the thespian. Logographic and hieroglyphs languages may mystify those not familiar with their scripts but each letter conveys a special meaning in a manner of picture story books that makes them superior in the eyes of those who have adopted them. What is important is that languages and dialects are unique to the defined ethnic groups. To the credit of English, it must be granted that it is the only language that is the language of science, commerce and international travel. Spanish and French despite their colonial links have remained confined to certain geographical segments. Truth be told, except English, all other languages have remained local by and large albeit rich with their unique cultural impressions. The wider appeal of the English language perhaps lies in the UK and the US spearheading scientific and commercial pursuits with all other languages languidly content in the cultural sphere. And BTW, despite the stiff upper lip caricature of the Englishman, English dictionary publishers have been open to enrichment of the language by foreign tongues. Guru and catamaran are just two of the Indian words adopted with alacrity by the English dictionaries uninhibited and unmarred by narrow considerations. Despite its rivalry with French, English has borrowed loanwords from French like savoir faire. Ditto for German (The writer is a senior columnist. His X account is @smurlidharan. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views) tags : Indian languages kamal haasan Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: June 01, 2025, 13:30 IST News opinion Opinion | Kamal Haasan's Linguistic Gaffe: Popularity Of Language Not Gauged By Antiquity But Usage
Hans India
a day ago
- Hans India
Colonisation of Sanskrit words: Distorting Dharma, Rashtra, and the soul of Bharat
Language shapes a civilization's worldview, and Sanskrit, the foundation of Bharat's knowledge systems, embodies millennia of wisdom. Colonial rule distorted key Sanskrit terms through Eurocentric and Abrahamic interpretations, reducing profound concepts like Dharma, Rashtra, and Swarajya to Western equivalents. This linguistic colonization misrepresented Bhartiya thought and disrupted societal structures and public understanding in post-colonial Bharat. 1. Dharma ≠ Religion Perhaps the most damaging mistranslation is the equating of Dharma with 'religion'. In reality, Dharma refers to the cosmic order, righteousness, duty, ethical living, and the path of self-realization. It is not tied to belief systems, deities, or dogmas. Dharma is contextual—what is Dharma for a teacher is different from that of a ruler or a child. It is a code of conduct embedded in time, place, and identity (svadharma). The Abrahamic idea of 'religion', based on exclusive truth claims, worship of a single God, and rigid institutional structures, is fundamentally different. By forcefully mapping Dharma onto 'religion', colonial and missionary forces created deep confusion, codified personal laws based on rigid texts, and set the stage for communal divisions. 2. Rashtra and Desha ≠ Nation or Country The Sanskrit Rashtra does not merely mean 'nation' in the European sense. A Rashtra is a sacred, cultural, and civilizational entity rooted in Dharma and shared spiritual values. It is not bound by geopolitical boundaries but by a consciousness—Bharat has been a Rashtra long before it became a 'nation-state'. The European model of a nation—emerging from treaties, colonialism, and power politics—views the state as a legal and administrative structure. This model was imposed on Bharat, diminishing its deep-rooted civilizational unity based on spiritual and cultural coherence, not political uniformity. Similarly, Desha simply refers to land or region, and was never a fixed nationalistic construct. By equating Rashtra and Desha with 'nation' or 'country,' we began to measure Bharat using foreign yardsticks, erasing the soul from the body. 3. Swarajya ≠ Freedom The word Swarajya, made famous by Bal Gangadhar Tilak and later echoed by Sri Aurobindo, was not just political independence. Swa-rajya means 'self-rule' at both individual and collective levels. It implies inner sovereignty—the mastery of one's senses, mind, and actions—as well as freedom from external domination. Colonial powers reduced Swarajya to mere political 'freedom', akin to European notions of liberty or civil rights. But Bharatiya thought considers freedom incomplete unless it is accompanied by Swatantrata (self-dependence) and Atma-nirbharta (self-realization and self-sufficiency). Today, even after political independence, the absence of Swarajya in intellectual, cultural, and economic spheres reflects a deeper bondage. True Swarajya begins with cultural decolonization. 4. Sanskriti ≠ Culture Sanskriti refers to refinement, inner evolution, and civilizational maturity. It comes from the root 'kr' (to do) with the prefix 'sam' (well) — meaning 'well-crafted' or 'refined behavior and thought.' Sanskriti embodies values, traditions, ethics, arts, sci ences, and collective memory rooted in Dharma. The English term 'culture' is often limited to external expressions—art, music, food, fashion, or festivals. It is secular, often aesthetic, and lacks the depth of inner evolution that Sanskriti demands. By substituting Sanskriti with 'culture,' we risk trivializing the soul of Bharatiya civilization, reducing it to 'cultural programs' or tourist-friendly 'heritage' rather than a way of life shaped by spiritual philosophy and lived wisdom. 5. Darshan ≠ Philosophy Darshan literally means 'to see' or 'vision'. In Bharatiya tradition, it refers to experiential systems of viewing reality—not speculative philosophy but intuitive insight into the nature of existence. The six schools of Darshan (Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Sankhya, Yoga, Mimamsa, Vedanta) are both logical and experiential. Western 'philosophy' derives from philo (love) and sophia (wisdom), but is often academic, analytical, and detached from practice. When Darshan is translated as 'philosophy,' the spiritual and experiential core of Bharatiya knowledge is lost. For instance, Yoga is not a 'philosophy' or 'exercise' routine—it is a Darshan, a living system to experience and attain liberation (moksha). Reducing Darshan to speculative thought undermines its transformative potential. 6. Jāti ≠ Caste Jāti refers to community, often based on occupation, locality, and shared customs. It was never a static or rigid birth-based system. With thousands of jātis across Bharat, the system was fluid, and social mobility was possible. The British censuses and legal codes rigidified jāti into 'caste'—a term borrowed from Portuguese casta, meaning breed or race. This racialized the Indian social structure and created a hierarchical system that aligned with colonial control mechanisms. The distorted caste system we see today is a colonial construct, not a native one. By fixing jātis into permanent social categories, colonizers divided our society to rule it more easily. This division still exploited today for political gain. 7. Karma ≠ Fate Karma means action. It is a law of cause and effect, empowering individuals to shape their destiny through their actions, thoughts, and intentions. It places moral and ethical responsibility on every being. Colonial translators, unfamiliar with the concept, portrayed Karma as 'fate' or 'destiny'—a passive acceptance of suffering. This misinterpretation painted Bharatiyas as fatalistic, submissive people who accepted oppression as karmic justice. In truth, Karma is not about helplessness but accountability. The colonial view undermined agency and created the illusion that Bharatiya society was inherently submissive. 8. Guru ≠ Teacher A Guru is not just a teacher, but a remover of darkness (gu = darkness, ru = remover). The Guru leads the disciple on a spiritual journey, imparting not just knowledge but wisdom, transformation, and inner awakening. Western education views the teacher as an instructor, often limited to subject matter expertise. The colonial system replaced the sacred Guru-shishya parampara with formal classroom models, devoid of emotional bonding, spiritual connection, or ethical training. 9. Moksha ≠ Heaven Moksha is liberation—freedom from the cycle of birth and death, realization of the Self, and unity with the infinite consciousness (Brahman) which is the ultimate goal. 'Heaven' in Abrahamic faiths is a reward for belief and good conduct, often a physical paradise. By equating moksha with heaven, the colonial mindset turned a deep philosophical goal into a simplistic post-death reward. The colonization of Sanskrit terms was not accidental; it was a deliberate act of erasing indigenous worldviews and replacing them with Western frameworks. This has led to decades of misunderstanding among foreigners including Bharatvasis. Correcting the colonial distortion of Sanskrit terms requires educational reforms, responsible media and academic usage, active efforts by cultural institutions to decolonize vocabulary, and a shift in public discourse beyond colonial binaries. Reclaiming the true essence of words like Dharma, Rashtra, Sanskriti, and Swarajya is not just about language, it is key to Bharat's civilizational revival through authentic reinterpretation and not mere revivalism. (The writer is an Expert, Creative Economy)
