(THE BEST OF

SPEAKING INDIA)
VOL:1

BOOK REVIEW

NAME OF THE STUDENT : MAKWANA DHAVAL

NAME OF THE STUDENT: OM KHOKHANI

SEMESTER : 2 sem DIVISION: B ROLL NO : 19292 &19256

DATE:__________________

GLS UNIVERSITY’S
 FACULTY OF COMMERCE

The book ‘THE BEST OF SPEAKING TREE ` volumes has two volumes. Every volumes has
Chifard topic in volumes there is a19 topic besd in our emotions, religion, eccias, works, our l8fe
style etc. Every topic has a different stories and every topic written by different writers. As we
mentioned there are B topics in there book
1. The first topic tell us about non violence
2. The word ‘ahins ` is reflecting from a lessons people like budhaa,
Mahatma Gandhi, guru nanak.
3. Non violence word is considered as a AHINSA in the Vedic age
Guru Nanak was imprisoned by babur he questioned God why this suffering was being inflicted
an his people. Because those day his very bloody for Sikh however he never advocated revenge.
 WAR AND THE DHARMA OF A JOURNALIST
What does a journalist do when his dharma as a journalist comes into conflict with what the State
holds to be his dharma as a patriot? Such a moral dilemma – which could arise at any time – is
especially acute during war.
Even though the conflict in Kargil was not one which jeopardised the very existence of the
country, the fact that young soldiers were fighting and dying placed a heavy moral burden on the
rest of society. In the interests of national solidarity, virtually everyone compromised on their
svabhava and svadharma. The businessman curbed his natural urge for maximum profits and
donated a small part of his earnings for the welfare of war widows. The mothers of slain soldiers
held back their tears whenever TV cameras intruded into their private moments of grief and
bravely declared that they would send all their sons to die at Kargil. In such a situation, it was
inevitable that journalists would also be affected by the national mood.
Had the journalists confined themselves to donating a day’s salary, the question of conflicting
dharmas might never have arisen. However, as purveyors of information, the media soon got
Caught up in what the State called `infowar’. Journalists had to grapple with a moral dilemma as
intractable as any: Was it justified to compromise one’s fidelity to the truth in order to further
what the State defined as the `war effort’?
Two weeks into the conflict, the country was appalled to learn that the bodies of six Indian
soldiers had been returned by Pakistan in a severely mutilated condition. Virtually every
Newspaper carried the gory details – as supplied by the Army to UNI – without waiting for
independent or even official confirmation. Strangely, such confirmation never arrived. The
Details revealed by the foreign minister, though horrific, fell far short of what was originally
alleged. Today, in fact, even though the government has stopped referring to the case as one of
`mutilation’ and chooses instead to call it `torture’, the allegation of brutal mutilation has stuck.
During the war, at least two newspapers received information that the allegation had been
Highly exaggerated; it was said that only one of the six bodies had shown signs of mutilation.
Yet, the journalists who received this information chose to remain silent.
As the battle progressed, at least one newspaper and one magazine also received reports from
correspondents at the front of incidents where Indian soldiers had mutilated the dead bodies
Of Pakistani soldiers. After a heated editorial debate, the decision was taken to `kill’ these
stories, at least till after the fighting was over.

In the Mahabharata, there are several instances where the imperative of truth-telling clashes with
other obligations. In once incident, Arjuna decides that he must obey his vow to kill anyone who
insults Gandiva, his bow, even though this means he must slay his elder brother Yudhisthira.
Fortunately, Krishna intervenes and counsels Arjuna that his duty to avoid
Fratricide must take precedence over his duty to be true to his word. Promise-keeping andtruth-
telling could be compromised, said Krishna, if lives could be saved as a result. He narrated the
story of Kaushika, a hermit who always spoke the truth. One day, some merchants passed by.
Soon thereafter, a gang of robbers arrived and asked Kaushika where the merchants had
Gone. Kaushika truthfully gave them the information they needed, with the result that the
merchants were robbed and killed. Since his act of truth-telling led to the loss of innocent lives,
Kaushika was punished by the gods and denied heaven after death.
As the late philosopher B K Matilal argued in an essay on moral dilemmas in the Mahabharata,
Krishna believed that ``under situational constraints, there might be stronger grounds for
rejecting truth-telling as a duty and accepting the stronger duty of saving an innocent life.’’
Acknowledging that dharma cannot be known by us as universally fixed, he nevertheless adds:
``But the acknowledgement of possible flexibility does not mean that the fixity and universality
of ethical laws will be entirely negotiable…Krishna allows for flexibility of dharma but this
Flexibility never means the `anything goes’ kind of morality.’’
Does Krishna offer the Indian journalist a way out of his moral dilemma during war? He
certainly does. The journalist must abide by his dharma so long as nothing he does leads to the
loss of an innocent life. To reveal crucial details of strategy when the war is being fought would
be an act of moral stupidity equal to that of Kaushika. But the suppression of the truth about
certain unpleasant incidents and the dissemination of half-truths and innuendoes alluded to above
did not save lives. All it did was to undermine the reputation of the Indian media.
 FIVE LESSONS IN DHARMA OF WAR
1.A revengeful instinct can only lead to one’s doom
Mahabharata may revolve around the war of duty. But we cannot escape the fact that the major
reason behind the destruction of all was revenge. The Kauravas lost everything to their blinded
desire to ruin the Pandavas. The war did not even spare the children, including Draupadi’s five
sons and Abhimanyu.
2.Stand by what’s right; even fight for it
Arjuna was initially hesitant to wage war against his kin. But Krishna reminded him that one has
to stand by Dharma (duty), even it meant going against one’s own family. Therefore, Arjuna had
to fulfill his responsibility as a great warrior of Dharma.
3.The eternal bond of friendship
The friendship between Krishna and Arjuna is something all of us look up to. It is perhaps
because of Krishna’s unconditional support and motivation that the Pandavas managed to survive
the war. None of us can forget the epic dice scene where it was Krishna who came to Draupadi’s
rescue while her husbands gambled her away to disgrace. The friendship between Karna and
Duryodhan, on the other hand, is no less inspiring.
4. Half knowledge can be dangerous
Arjuna’s son Abhimanyu teaches us how half-knowledge can have an adverse impact. While
Abhimanyu knew how to enter the Chkaravyuh, he did not know the way out.
5.Don’t be swayed by greed
What did Yudhishthir win out of greed? On the contrary, he lost everything he possessed—from
his kingdom to his wealth. And to gamble away a woman in the pursuit of hubris! How can one
possibly justify that?