Former Supreme Court Justice Kim Jae-hyung and Professor Kweon Tae-sang propose practical guidelines based on an empirical analysis of court rulings, offering newsrooms a framework for balancing press freedom with personality rights

Who is a public figure?

A president or Member of Parliament clearly qualifies. But what about a business executive, celebrity, athlete or YouTuber with millions of followers? And how far should the media be allowed to go in reporting on their spouses, children or partners?

These are not questions unique to South Korea. Newsrooms everywhere confront the same tension between the public’s right to know and an individual’s rights to reputation, privacy and dignity. In the age of social media, where an ordinary person can become internationally known almost overnight, the boundary has become even harder to draw.

Two South Korean legal scholars have proposed a framework that deserves attention beyond Korea.

Kim Jae-hyung, professor at Seoul National University School of Law and a former justice of the Supreme Court of Korea, and Kweon Tae-sang, professor at Ewha Woman’s University School of Law, published a 60-page study, “Criteria for Determining the Unlawfulness of Personality Rights Infringements Arising from Media Coverage of Public Figures,” in the August 2026 issue of Justice, a journal published by the Korean Legal Center.

What makes their work particularly useful for journalists is that it does not stop at legal theory. The authors examine court decisions empirically and statistically, then translate their findings into practical guidelines that journalists can consider before publication.

A public figure is not simply a famous person

The researchers begin by changing the question.

Instead of asking simply, “Who is a public figure?” they ask why reporting on certain people should be treated differently from reporting on private individuals.

They define public figures broadly as people about whom there is a substantial public interest in reporting, considering their social position, role and influence.

They then identify three principal factors for determining public-figure status: *voluntariness, public relevance and fame*.

These factors are not intended as a mechanical checklist. They interact. The stronger and more numerous the factors, the greater the justification may be for giving freedom of expression wider scope.

Of particular significance is the distinction between public relevance and mere fame.

A politician exercising governmental authority and a famous actor discussing family life may both be widely known, but the public interest in scrutinizing them is not necessarily the same. Likewise, an influencer with millions of followers does not automatically surrender all rights to privacy simply by being famous.

That distinction has relevance far beyond Korea.

What the courts actually show

Another strength of the research is its use of empirical evidence.

Using court-decision data analyzed by Korea’s Press Arbitration Commission, the study found that in defamation cases from 2021 through 2023, public figures obtained at least a partial victory in 77 of 193 cases, or 39.8 percent. Private individuals prevailed in 73 of 143 cases, or 51 percent.

The difference was even greater in damages claims: public figures succeeded in 31.3 percent of cases, compared with 50 percent for private individuals.

The numbers suggest that Korean courts already tend to allow broader freedom of expression when reporting concerns public figures.

But this does not mean that anything may be reported about someone once that person is classified as a public figure.

Public-figure status is only one consideration.

The proposed framework also asks courts — and journalists — to consider the public interest of the information itself, the benefits of publication versus the harm inflicted on the individual, urgency and timeliness, the reliability of sources, and the form and manner in which the information is reported.

Turning a courtroom test into a newsroom question

This is where the Korean proposal becomes particularly relevant internationally.

Courts usually make these judgments after publication. An article is published, a person claims that reputation or privacy has been violated, and a judge subsequently weighs freedom of expression against personality rights.

Kim and Kweon propose moving those questions upstream — into the newsroom before publication.

A reporter or editor could ask:

Why is this person subject to public scrutiny?

Does this particular information genuinely serve the public interest?

Does the social value of publication outweigh the harm to the individual?

Are the sources sufficiently reliable?

Could the same information be reported in a less intrusive way?

None of these questions is uniquely Korean.

They can be asked by a reporter investigating a politician in Seoul, a corporate executive in New York, a celebrity in Tokyo, an athlete in Paris or an influencer in New Delhi.

Not a restriction on press freedom

The term “reporting guidelines” can sound like another set of restrictions on journalists. The logic of this proposal, however, points in a different direction.

A clear and reasonable framework can strengthen press freedom by helping journalists explain why intrusive reporting is justified.

Kim has spent decades examining the tension between freedom of expression and personality rights from several different positions — as a judge, legal scholar, Supreme Court justice and chairman of the Korea Press Ethics Commission.

His engagement with the public-figure question dates back more than three decades. In 1995, while serving as a judge, he wrote the judgment in a case involving the novel The Rose of Sharon Has Bloomed, whose fictional narrative drew upon the life of Korean physicist Lee Whiso. The decision has been described as the first Korean judgment to use the concept of a “public figure” or “public person.”

More than 30 years later, the media environment has changed radically.

Political leaders and senior officials are no longer the only people capable of exercising enormous public influence. Business leaders, athletes, entertainers, creators and influencers can command audiences larger than those of traditional newspapers or broadcasters.

At the same time, YouTube channels and social-media accounts can perform functions once largely reserved for professional news organizations.

The central question is therefore increasingly not simply who is a journalist, but *what responsibility accompanies the act of communicating information to a mass public*.

From a Korean guideline to a global newsroom tool

Legal systems differ. The constitutional protection of speech, defamation law and privacy rules in South Korea are not identical to those in the United States, Europe, Japan, India or elsewhere.

The Korean framework should therefore not simply be transplanted into another legal system.

Its underlying reasoning, however, travels well.

People who voluntarily exercise significant public influence should generally face greater scrutiny. Fame alone should not erase privacy. The public value of information should be weighed against the harm caused by publication. Source reliability and reporting methods should matter.

These are not uniquely Korean principles. They are questions at the heart of responsible journalism.

And in the age of AI and social media, the issue is becoming global. Once information is published, it can cross borders within seconds. Journalists are no longer the only actors capable of causing enormous reputational harm — or exposing wrongdoing of enormous public importance.

The guidelines proposed by Kim and Kweon could therefore be examined by news organizations, journalism schools, press councils and journalists’ associations outside Korea, adapted where necessary to their own laws and professional traditions.

They could also provide a useful starting point for an international discussion about common principles for reporting on public figures.

Ultimately, the most important question for a journalist before publication may be surprisingly simple:

Not “How famous is this person?” but “Why does the public need to know this?”

A newsroom that can answer that question persuasively is in a stronger position both to defend press freedom and to respect human dignity.

A reporting framework developed in Korea need not remain a Korean framework.

Read: Investigative Journalism Shields Human Rights

______________

Courtesy: The AsiaN, Seoul, South Korea

The post Rethinking How Media Covers Public Figures first appeared on Sindh Courier.

By: Paras Aijaz Sario

We live in a world where saying something has never been easier.

We can send our thoughts across the world in seconds. We can share an opinion with hundreds of people, explain ourselves through messages, record our feelings in voice notes, and speak to someone without ever being in the same room. We have become remarkably good at expressing ourselves, But somewhere along the way, I wonder if we became less willing to understand one another.

We are quick to notice how someone dresses, how they speak, the choices they make, or the way they respond to something. We form impressions almost immediately. Sometimes, before we know anything about a person’s circumstances, we have already decided what kind of person they are.

What we rarely see is everything that came before the moment we judged them.

We do not know what they have been through, what they are trying to protect, what they fear, or what made a particular choice feel right to them at that point in their life. Yet we are often more comfortable questioning someone’s decision than asking what led them there.

Perhaps that is where listening begins – not with agreeing with someone, but with being willing to understand them before deciding what to think about them.

There is a difference between hearing a person and actually listening to them.

Hearing requires little from us. Listening asks us to stay.

It means allowing someone to finish a thought without immediately preparing our response. It means resisting the urge to turn every story into a comparison with our own, or to offer advice before understanding what the other person is actually trying to say.

Sometimes someone tells us something difficult, and before they finish, we respond with our own experience.

“I went through the same thing.”

Sometimes we offer a solution before understanding the problem. Sometimes we tell people what they should have done when they are still trying to explain why they did what they did.

We may call it conversation.

But conversation without understanding can leave a person feeling more alone than silence would have.

Maybe that is one reason people have become so careful about what they share.

Trust is not automatic anymore. Before telling someone what is really going on inside, we often wonder whether our words will remain with them. Will they understand, or will they judge? Will our vulnerability be treated with care, or become another story someone tells when we are not there?

People do not always become quiet because they have nothing to say.

Sometimes they become quiet because they have learned what happens after they speak. They have been misunderstood, interrupted, compared, or judged. Eventually, silence can begin to feel safer than honesty.

And yet, most of us know what it feels like to want the opposite.

We want someone who will listen without immediately deciding who we are. Someone who can hear a difficult thought without turning it into a judgment. Someone who can disagree with our choices without reducing us to those choices.

There is something deeply comforting about being around a person who does not make you explain your humanity before allowing you to be heard.

That may be why good listeners are so memorable.

They do not necessarily give us perfect advice. They do not always solve anything. Sometimes they simply give us enough space to finish what we were trying to say.

And when we leave that conversation, something inside us feels a little lighter not because our problem disappeared, but because for a moment, we did not have to carry it alone.

The strange thing is that we all seem to want this kind of understanding. We want people to listen when we speak. We want our choices to be understood. We want our feelings to be taken seriously.

Yet we can forget to offer the same patience to others.

We become frustrated by someone’s reaction without wondering what caused it. We criticize a choice without knowing the circumstances surrounding it. We label someone difficult, distant, careless, or insensitive without considering that there may be a part of their story we have never been told.

Understanding someone does not mean agreeing with everything they do. It does not mean excusing harmful behavior or pretending every decision is right. It simply means recognizing that a person is more complicated than the small part of their life that happens to be visible to us.

We are all living with context that other people cannot see.

The friend who suddenly stops replying may be struggling with something they have not found the words to explain. The person making a decision we cannot understand may be choosing between circumstances we know nothing about. And the person we judged too quickly may simply be carrying a life we have never had to live.

None of this means we should stop having opinions.

It means we should become more careful about turning opinions into conclusions about people.

There is a difference between saying, “I don’t understand this choice,” and saying, “I understand what kind of person would make it.”

The first leaves room for curiosity.

The second closes the door.

Maybe that is what we have slowly lost: curiosity about one another.

We hear a sentence and imagine the intention. We see a decision and create the story behind it. We respond before we have understood. Perhaps the world does not need fewer voices as much as it needs more people willing to pause between hearing something and deciding what it means. Because listening is not simply staying quiet while someone else speaks.

It is choosing, for a moment, to put our assumptions aside. It is accepting that we may not know the whole story. It is giving another person the dignity of being more than our first impression of them.

We spend so much of our lives wanting to be understood.

Perhaps we should remember that everyone else is carrying that same wish.

The person sitting across from us. The friend who has gone unusually quiet. The family member whose choices we do not understand. Even the stranger whose life we know nothing about.

They may all be hoping, in their own way, that someone will look beyond the obvious and listen long enough to understand.

We cannot know everything a person carries.

But we can choose not to make their story smaller than it is.

We can ask before assuming. We can listen before answering. We can leave room for a perspective different from our own.

And perhaps, in a world that has become very good at talking, that small decision is more meaningful than we realize.

Because sometimes, what a person needs most is not someone who has the right words.

It is someone willing to stay long enough to hear the words they are still trying to find.

Read: Listening to People, Strengthening Governance

___________________

Paras Aijaz is a Computer Science student from Larkana, Sindh. She writes personal reflective essays about growth, student life, and the quiet emotional experiences that many people carry but rarely express.

The post Voices Rise, Attention Falls Silent first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Speaking with Dr. Manjeet Rathee, he explores how universal poetic consciousness and ethical education can restore humanity’s deep cosmic responsibility.

Dr. Anand, how do your epics challenge the moral complacency of contemporary society?

Literature has been perceived as a moral agency, which gives an ethical direction to social forces. But, of late, due to various movements in literature, committed writing is looked upon as second rate. Writers are not expected to be didactic, and write like preachers. Literature, on the other hand, is expected to remain neutral, and not give any moral instruction.  Such a feeling is the result of the increasing sense of freedom and individuality among the people, and even among writers who want to assert their individuality against social forces, which shape the running narrative. This is the world of the wise, in which, it is expected, everyone knows enough, thanks to the mobile phone. But, in this atmosphere of the non-commital, we witness a consistent downfall in moral standards. The passion of success has obliterated all the boundaries between the desirable and the undesirable. In fact, our upcoming generations have no idea where the right ends and the foul begins. In such a scenario, if we do not apply brakes, we are hastening the fall. That is why I believe only Literature can do this arduous work of making the people realize the dangers of moral neutrality. We have set up an International Academy of Ethics, and introduced the Ethical Alphabet. We also have on our agenda that during the prayer time, all the students and teachers should read out in a single voice that they will not let their knowledge be misused for bringing harm to the society. It is only a reminder to remain committed to the ideals of humanity.

DECLARATION

I promise that I shall never use the knowledge I gain from my education to harm the society in any way.

As the founding President of the IAE, what new framework have you proposed to address the ethical dilemmas of the 21st century?

The IAE is trying to indulge in dialogue with people who influence large tracts of humanity.  It is by word of mouth, and inspiration that we are trying to bring more and more people into the ambit of the Academy. The Academy stands for introducing the idea of Ethics in the curriculum of very small kids. For which, an ethical alphabet has been designed. We have several ambassadors who are spreading the word around. Good sense, right thinking, helping others, and compassion are the hall marks of ethical living. We want to create a happy atmosphere in society, and remove its toxicity with a spirit of doing the right. Articles by scholars and discussions are organized mostly online. Some international conventions are also held which create a favourable impact on the society, by altering their thought patterns. IAE believes in reformatting the minds of the young people so that they usher in a new brave world of beauty, joy and shared prosperity.

In what ways does your concept of “poetry as an instrument of planetary consciousness” contribute to global dialogue on literature and spirituality?

No doubt a poet is placed in a specific set of circumstances which are peculiar to his existence, yet, the feed of poetry comes from the water under the earth which has unitary cosmic consciousness, and from the skies, which know no human borders. Even birds do not bother about our borders at the line of control. Man, with his limiting processes, erects borders which define him, but the greatest cosmic activity, death, just throws all his borders open, and he meets the eternal as soon the soul leaves the death-trap, i.e. human body. Thus, poetry belongs to the cosmos, and unless it is written under social diktats, poetry in its original avatar addresses the cosmic reality, and tries to project human condition in the context of the divine. This helps poetry to rise above the divisions of human perception, and blend into a universal address to the cosmic forces, which necessitate this planetary consciousness from its poets.

How does your multidimensional work based on return to ethics, illuminate the responsibility of individuals in a globalized world?

When we arrive on the earth, we are accompanied by a package of a thousand benedictions, which help us grow into decent human beings. What is expected back from us? If somebody gives us some money, will he not expect anything from us? It is not commerce, I call it cosmic responsibility. We are not here on earth simply to learn and earn our livelihood. That is a very limiting view of human life. Man is considered a better organism than birds, animals and vegetation, though man’s rashness with regard to gaining knowledge and then using it for destroying nature and his own self, makes me think that he lacks the basic sense of dignity and responsibility which birds and animals possess aplenty.  This awareness of cosmic responsibility, that man is related to the creation in more ways than one, that he derives his subsistence from nature, and to nature and God he must return their kindnesses, we wish to impart this sense of belonging and responsibility to man. IAE believes that man’s existence on the earth is not morally and ethically neutral. Our education which is increasingly becoming ambiguous so far as our moral responsibilities are concerned, is causing large scale damage to human stuff.

What does the wide range of international honours, from Serbia to Italy, Germany, Russia and India – reveal about the universal appeal of your literary and ethical vision?

As I said earlier, poetry possesses the power to transcend the immediate and interact with the ultimate [planetary consciousness]. Just as water below the earth, and the air above it do not accept any classification, poetry too needs no labels, no nationalities.  It represents the human sentiment which is the same everywhere. It deals with issues of our existence on the earth, as well as beyond. This transcendental element of my poetry, appealed to the people from different climes, who possessed a similar poetic consciousness. That is why, my poetry found an echo and recognition from several countries as you have mentioned. In my opinion, just as in addition to being individuals, that too highly defined, poetically speaking, we, at the same time, are cosmic citizens, and if our writings are transfused with universal empathy, they will be admired by people situated far away from our national borders. The translation of my poems into Chinese, Vietnamese, Greek, Arabic, Persian, French, Italian, Serbian etc. only indicates universal acceptance of my poetry. For which, I am thankful to the Muse.

***

Dr. Jernail S. Anand, with 200 books to his credit [20 epics] is a Chandigarh-based polymath, and a vital architect of the 21st century ethical literature whose seminal work ‘Lustus: The Prince of Darkness’ challenges the moral complacency of our era.  Founding President of the International Academy of Ethics, and Laureate of Charter of Morava [Serbia], Seneca [Italy], Franz Kafka [Germany, Ukraine, Czech Rep] and Maxim Gorky [Russia], his name is inscribed on the Poets’ Rock in Serbia. He is an Honorary Member of the Serbian Writers Association, Belgrade.

Email: anandjs55@yahoo.com.

Bibliography: https://sites.google.com/view/bibliography-dr-jernal-singh/home  

 https://share.google/QtiWrcFr7Sca7v0qC

Read: Poetry is not a Romantic Luxury

______________________

Dr. Manjeet Rathee is a retired Senior Professor, Department of English, Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, India. She specializes in Media and Gender Studies, has contributed more than 60 research papers & Poems in National, International Journals; Published 7 books, including 4 collections of poems in Hindi and edited 3 books. She is actively involved in Community participation/Outreach Programs related to non-formal education.  

The post Cultivating Global Ethics for Next Generation first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Dr. Nisar Solangi

The modern world is governed by an unprecedented network of constitutions, legal codes, international treaties, and human rights conventions. From the United Nations Charter to national constitutions and environmental agreements, humanity has never possessed so many written laws intended to protect peace, justice, and human dignity. Yet wars continue, corruption flourishes, environmental destruction accelerates, and international law is frequently violated.

This paradox invites a fascinating historical reflection. More than four thousand years ago, the Indus Valley Civilization—one of the world’s earliest urban societies—appears to have maintained remarkable civic order without leaving behind any deciphered legal code or written ethical literature.

The Indus script remains undeciphered. No equivalent of the Code of Hammurabi has been discovered. No philosophical treatises, moral sermons, or legal manuals survive. Archaeologists therefore cannot identify the civilization’s formal ethical doctrines or legal principles.

Yet the archaeological evidence tells an extraordinary story.

Across an area extending from present-day Pakistan to northwestern India, Indus cities displayed remarkable uniformity in their urban planning. Streets followed carefully designed grids. Sophisticated drainage systems carried wastewater beneath cities. Public wells provided access to clean water, while standardized brick sizes and weights promoted consistency in construction and commerce.

Unlike contemporary civilizations in Mesopotamia and Egypt, the Indus world produced no colossal royal palaces, pyramids, or monumental tombs celebrating kings and military conquest. Instead, enormous resources appear to have been invested in civic infrastructure that benefited the entire community.

Many archaeologists interpret these features as evidence of a society that emphasized cooperation, public welfare, and standardized civic norms rather than conspicuous royal power. While this should not be mistaken for proof of democracy or formal equality, it suggests an unusually collective approach to urban life for the Bronze Age.

The contrast with today’s world is striking. Modern societies possess detailed legal systems enforced by courts and governments, yet written laws alone have not prevented armed conflicts, corruption, inequality, financial crimes, or violations of international humanitarian law.

Political philosophers have long argued that laws are effective only when supported by social values and institutions that encourage voluntary compliance. A legal system written on paper cannot guarantee ethical conduct if public trust and civic responsibility are absent.

The Indus Civilization appears to illustrate the opposite phenomenon. Although no readable ethical texts survive, its cities embody what may be called “practical ethics”—values expressed through infrastructure, standardization, sanitation, and collective investment in public goods. The civilization’s material remains suggest that cooperation and public welfare were embedded in everyday urban life rather than proclaimed through surviving written commandments.

This does not mean that the Indus Civilization possessed a moral code comparable to the Ten Commandments or other later religious traditions. Such a conclusion would exceed the available evidence because the script remains undeciphered and no legal or philosophical texts can be read. Nevertheless, its archaeological legacy demonstrates that ethical principles may sometimes be reflected more powerfully in institutions and daily practices than in written declarations.

Perhaps the enduring lesson of the Indus Valley Civilization is that civilization is measured not merely by the laws it writes but by the values it practices. In an age when legal frameworks are increasingly challenged by conflict and division, the silent cities of the Indus remind us that public trust, civic responsibility, and investment in the common good may be among humanity’s oldest—and most necessary—foundations of social order.

(Written with the support of AI)

Read: Uncovering the Secrets of the Indus Valley Civilization and Its Un-deciphered Script

_________________________

Dr. Nisar Solangi is based in Saudi Arabia 

The post Lessons from the Indus Valley Civilization first appeared on Sindh Courier.

By Regina Resta

On Tuesday, February 24, 2026, the award ceremony of the Ethical Journalism Prize “Lights of Truth” took place in Rome at the Ministry of Culture – Spadolini Hall, Via del Collegio Romano 27. The initiative, promoted by the Cultural Association VerbumlandiArt APS at the instigation of Manfredi Potenti, was created to highlight journalism capable of combining rigor, courage, and ethical responsibility in a historical phase marked by disinformation and a crisis of trust in public storytelling.

The “Lights of Truth” Award does not position itself in competition with other recognitions, but rather as a space of light, reflection, and gratitude toward those who defend truth as a common good. The conception and organization of the initiative were entrusted to Regina Resta, President of VerbumlandiArt APS and of the Award; Maria Pia Turiello, President of the Scientific Committee and Vice President of the Award; and Mirella Cristina, lawyer and journalist, member of the Scientific Committee. Further authority was provided by the Honorary Committee, which includes Nico Spuntoni, Francesco Mura, Francesco Lenoci, Goffredo Palmerini, Roberto Sciarrone, and Vinicio Leonetti, prominent figures in the journalistic and cultural landscape.

Among the Italian award recipients are H.E. Cardinal Fernando Filoni, Anna Maria Esposito, Brunella Bolloli, David Parenzo, Giovan Battista Brunori, Giulia Sorrentino, Manuela Sain, Maria Rita Grieco, Marilena Vinci, Massimo Giraldi, and Silvia Grassi.

The foreign award recipients section, proposed by the international cultural promoter, includes Aleksander Cipa (Albania), Alketa Gashi Fazliu (Kosovo), Tarana Turan Rahimi (Azerbaijan), and Marinellys Tremamunno (Venezuela), further confirming the increasingly international profile of the initiative. Significant space is also dedicated to the younger generation, with youth award recipients Angelo Baracco, Antonio Errigo, Federica Tomasello, and Mulengezi Adolphe Mihingano, in support of emerging talent and responsible journalism looking toward the future.

The awards presented during the ceremony are original and unique works by the Salento-based artist Tommaso Filieri (Galatone, Lecce), handcrafted and conceived as authentic and unrepeatable symbols of the ethical value of the profession.

Rome, the institutional and cultural heart of the country, hosted the Ethical Journalism Award “Lights of Truth” at the Ministry of Culture, a venue of great symbolic value, strengthening the link between information, civic responsibility, and democratic heritage. All media outlets are following the initiative closely, recognizing its national and international significance in promoting conscious, independent journalism oriented toward the common good.

The Spadolini Hall, located within the Ministry of Culture (MiC) in Rome, is named after Giovanni Spadolini, Italian historian, journalist, and politician, founder and first Minister for Cultural and Environmental Heritage in 1974. It symbolizes the birth of the Ministry, which separated from the Ministry of Public Education in order to independently safeguard Italy’s cultural and environmental heritage. As a historian and man of culture, Spadolini conceived the Ministry not as a bureaucratic body, but as a dedication to the protection of Italy’s artistic and historical heritage, viewing it as a living resource for the nation.

_________________________

Read: Ethics – The Silent Compass

The post Lights of Truth: Rome Honors Ethical Journalism first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Dr. Jernail Singh Anand  | India

The Great Disconnect

Heart is the radioactive matter placed inside the body of every living being, which receives and radiates messages to the cosmic divine.  In fact, we are, all the time, connected with supernal forces, through our breath, and we are a part of the manifestation of God’s creative magic. The scriptures want us to realize how we are a part of the cosmos, and how we should act, so that we respect that eternal bond. Education is meant to give us light, in which we could see, what we are, and where we stand, and what is the surrounding reality, and how we should relate to it meaningfully. But, education has gone overboard, and overreached its ends, so that now man thinks he can outdo his creator. Science and technology are treated as challenges to the divine authority.

There is immense knowledge in the vaults of the earth, but it is not available to men in its entirety because earth reveals its mysteries only to people who have the capability to assimilate, and look beyond their self, and see the overflowing reality. The cosmos tests the beneficiaries of its intellectual affluence, and very few stand the severe test of elements, which ensure that after getting knowledge, it will be used, not for the gratification of one person, but for the betterment of the creation. This is the point at which most of the seekers falter, and lose to infernal forces. Divinity does not trust people who show lack of higher purpose and whose passion has no higher perspective. That is why, whatever more or less knowledge we have, it is being directed towards destruction of nature and ultimately, man will land himself in a state where he will die of suffocation as the clean air will not be available for breathing.

This is how education and limited understanding of scriptures has brought us to a situation in which we are in a state of disconnect. We have our own wisdom which is in contention with the divine wisdom. Today men believe that man is born to live for himself, and die for himself, in utter disregard of any higher purpose. Struggle for existence signifies man’s struggle for survival. But, now that we have survived so many onslaughts, we have to contend with the unfolding reality of how to live? How to make our life meaningful. We have to think of beauty, decency, goodness and our commitment to the divine for promoting the welfare of the cosmic community going beyond the idea of humanism.

Post Connect

The world that thought from the heart, and felt from the mind, the world of unified sensibility which T.S. Eliot talks of, has been buried deep in the opaque layers of history. This is the world which only thinks with its mind, which is trained in such a way that it is focused on the elevation of the self. Education now serves to sever a young man’s connection from the society around, and turn all his passions inside, so that he starts thinking nothing matters except the package and then the apex of success. This is not expected from people with a universal consciousness. Rather, it is the rotten mental stuff which will infect the whole lot. Pitiably, we have got millions of teachers now trained in this passion for self-possession, who are imparting tips to the young through videos on you tube, how to serve their self, become rich, and land astronomical packages. And, I have no hesitation in saying, cheating, double dealing, and fraud are tricks in trade, and they are not considered outlandish for this society nurtured on moral complacency.

Decyphering Disconnect

The societies are crying hoarse in the name of culture. But folk dresses, folk dances, and folk songs end up only to lend a spectacular splendour only. At heart, nobody looks back. Efforts at cultural revival are proving counter-productive and blowing hot and cold at the same time. Young men in colleges who love modern life, its chores and its thrills, when don traditional dresses, only present a false spectacle of love for the things gone by. Who wants to go back to times of the bullock cart age which is being idealized in our revivalists songs? It is only noise and clutter in the music albums or in social media. Nobody wants to lead a life without a mobile phone. Farmers know their youngsters don’t like to work in the fields, rather they prefer to mortgage their lands, and migrate to cities and enjoy making films on culture. A culture which they have deserted. The culture of parents, village, the water tank, animals. So, what I want stress here is: it has caused disconnect between what we are and what we profess to be. The electronic songs won’t salvage our condition in which we do not believe.

The same disconnect is evident in the case of religion also. Look at you tube, and the deluge of the holy hymns being played.  In spite of such an electronic spurt in religious activity, the religious content in human life is on the decline. People who are truly religious believe in a life of piety, humility, compassion, and honesty. But the men we meet who often visit shrines are just the reverse. What is the reason? Even in religious orders, we see instances of indecent behaviour. The idea of righteous living, which means ethical conduct, has disappeared from the life of these people.

Let me revert to my statement in the beginning of this article that our hearts are radioactive, and we connect with the divine through our breath, which is a part of the cosmic equipment. We are a part of the spectacle, and the manifestation. So long as our heart is involved in an activity, it is radiated to the cosmos, and Gods listen to our prayers. And they do respond.  But, look at what is going on now. Instead of our heart, instead of our consciousness, it is the TV which is singing religious songs, and those who sang these songs have already made a lot of money. We have lost connect with the divine, and all our actions aimed at pleasing gods are just playing to the gallery. Contentless. That is why, all our prayers go unheeded. We play games with divine forces, and disregard all our cosmic responsibilities.  And this process of disunification is going on at a faster speed. We think we have accumulated knowledge.  I think this knowledge has hastened our fall. All our actions now onwards, when we are overusing knowledge, overplaying our wisdom, we are actually overreaching ourselves. The breakup with the divine is complete and absolute.

Cosmic Regeneration of Mankind

Here, the role of literature gains significance. What time has not corrupted is the essential wisdom of the Vedas. The Prophets still say what they said, unaffected by the currents of time. The great poets and scholars and philosophers still stand aloft, no matter how great were the storms in the oceans of time. The wisdom of humanity still remains ingrained in our scriptures. Only the teachers can check this drift of mankind into the ocean of nothingness. It is not enough to dissect the malaise, there have been scholars who have very effectively diagnosed the social issues. In fact, time has come when the philosophers take the lead, and followed by writers, they should impact the thought processes of the upcoming generations, to weed out ambition, and criminal psychology. Scientists who are working with technology, and creating new inventions like the AI need to be informed by the saner elements to stop the research which can lead to the extinction of human life.

The message is very clear. If philosophers and scientists do not come together to halt this suicidal march, there is no hope for mankind. That is why, I think that after the dystopian times, we need to introduce a new horizon to our life and letters. It is the new world of hope and all efforts of the writers and philosophers, and scientists and technologists should be on the cosmic regeneration of mankind.

Read: Illegitimate Offspring of Moral Violators

__________________

Hailing from Chandigarh, India, The author is Laureate of Seneca Award, Charter of Morava, Franz Kafka and Maxim Gorky Awards, and President, International Academy of Ethics

The post The Cosmic Regeneration of Mankind first appeared on Sindh Courier.

• The most disastrous thing that has happened to modern times is that we are back to body language. Our language has failed us. We still believe in the power of the muscles

Dr. Jernail S. Anand | India

If language is the ultimate manifestation of the evolution of a society, which going beyond mere communication, becomes the mirror of a society’s personality,  we are in for shocks because our language conveys disturbing messages about our evolution  and brings into question the progression of which we feel so proud.

It all started with the body, when formal language symbols were not in existence. The body was the language of communication. Our gestures conveyed our agreement or disagreement. Sahir Ludhianvi, in one of his poems says: ‘Har tarah ke jazbaad ki pehchaan hain aankhen’. Eyes declare every emotion, every sentiment.

The development of the language, its signs, its acceptance across the continents, brought in visible advantages of mankind, and the circumference of human understanding expanded, leading to sympathy, understanding, a spirit of co-existence and a shared vision of world as we see it today, some threatening exceptions notwithstanding.

So far as body language is concerned, our idioms and proverbs are witness of the use of body parts to convey different emotions effectively. When people disagree, we rush to the eyes of man, and say: they do not see eye to eye. We walked ‘hand in hand’. They are ‘hand in glove’. He has an ‘oily tongue’. The victory was a ‘cake-walk’. He is a ‘loose foot’. So, we use our body to denote our emotional conditions.

But language has finally deserted us.

It has to be understood that we had left behind the body, and gone over to sophisticated linguistic patterns, as a result of the progress of the perceptive mind. By language, I mean words, arguments, debates. In the past, muscles and arms were the final arbiters. It was the most powerful who dictated what was just. But, as language progressed, people stopped believing in might is right, and gradually, came to believe that justice means much more than physical might.  Men should have gone over to a state of existence where logic, reason, and wisdom mattered, and in this situation, the lettered men should have been considered the best of the tribe.

We can see it happening at several platforms, where people are engaged in debates and discussions, and justice is being debated and argued in the courts of law. It is a happy sign for humanity, that at least, the muscles and musclemen do not finally decide things. That there is the rule of law.

I would like to register a strong protest when people often call out: it is not the law of jungle. We have laws in our society. Of late, our society has become a jungle, and it is worse than the jungle because the law of the jungle is based on the innate wisdom of its denizens. We human beings cannot be taken for granted. We are not sure if we harbour any wisdom in the upper chamber.

The problem that now has cropped up, where language has suffered a great set back, is man’s overarching smartness, to put language into a trap. They speak the language of law, but enact unlawful deeds. More dangerous is the use of violent vocabulary for ordinary actions. A news item can be like this: Indian team bleeds England to death. This type of vocabulary to describe defeat is self-defeating. Then, there are WhatsApp groups in which language is molested. These days, there is a swag when people use mixed language such as Life4art. Now, it means Life for Art. What is bad if we use ‘for’ instead of 4. It is simply to attract attention, by indulging in oddities.

Some words which were highly respected in the past have now become a repository of fear. Truth is intolerable now. If you use this word with any piece of writing, the author can expect a call from some investigating agency. Goodness is highly suspect, so are godly men, because, those who are seen singing god’s praises, next day, are found behind the bars. In ‘The Merchant of Venice’, Antonio says that ‘The Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose’.  The worst people are found to use religious texts extensively, and visit shrines, go for pilgrimages, turning these holy expressions hollow.  The most hollow words today are love, affection, marriage, and commitment. Frailty thy name is woman, it was often said. Guile thy name is man, I insist.

Society has suffered at the hands of smart men. And language is the medium which has been badly mauled and molested, by clever practitioners of guile. The most disastrous thing that has happened to modern times is that we are back to body language. Our language has failed us. We still believe in the power of the muscles. We are back to arms. I wonder if in spite of education, philosophy and spirituality, we ever left the plane of physical power, violence and domination. What is our world now? Only one language. Arms. Bombs. Kill-Power. We have bombed all logic. Flattened all reason. We have sentenced to RI, all the holy texts, which preached truth, love, temperance, kindness and happiness.

We are back to our bare hands, with which we broke the twigs. Now we break heads. And then we have a fiery vocabulary to describe our actions. Education has trained us to put language to multiple uses, and use the one best suited to your particular situation. No text means anything now. Language has no loyalty.  It is a harlot, which dances at the dictates of its customers.

Read: Nurturing Generations: Parents’ Duty to Society

______________

Hailing from Chandigarh, India, The author is Laureate of Seneca Award, Charter of Morava, Franz Kafka and Maxim Gorky Awards, and President, International Academy of Ethics

The post The Fall of the Language first appeared on Sindh Courier.

The jungle ‘raaj’ is original and superior, whereas man’s laws are artificial and inferior, if not altogether infernal.

Dr. Jernail S. Anand

Whenever there are events involving injustice and wildness, we often say, it is ‘jungle raaj’ [the law of the jungle].  The jungle is abused as we often abuse a man who has done an indecent job calling him a dog.  A crow, when crows, is a harbinger of a cherished guest, but a crow, nowadays,  is mentioned more as one, who is killed and hung aloft for a lesson to other crows.

When we compare a man’s mischief, we go to monkeys and cats, and when we refer to his power, we catch the lion. However, when men eat human flesh, and turn indiscriminate, we invoke wolves. A man who is dunce is likened to an ass, and if something is going very fast, it is said to be talking to the winds. How is power of a man measured if not as horse-power. And most of all, when we have to reject something as absurd, a bull comes to our rescue, along with his shit. We call it ‘bull-shit’.  The jungle is never far away when we men have to say something, and it has to be exemplified   from the animal world.

In fact, we go to nature to authenticate our experience. In the same way as we quote from great authors and thinkers and even from Vedas. If some man has eaten up some other person, there is no way to say it more effectively than saying that he has eaten into him like ‘deemak’ [termites].  If some misfortune strikes a man, we compare it will lightning.

If we have to compare a man’s steadfastness, we invoke mountains. If a man starts going to a place of worship after committing sins, we are reminded of a cat going for Hajj after eating nine hundred mice. And if we want to tell man he should have a great patience, Farid the great poet says: a man should have the patience of a tree.  Men who are full of wisdom, are humble just as a branch bearing a fruit bends.  As pure as the Ganges, as high as the Himalayas, I wonder if there is any human emotion which can be delivered authentically without referring to nature.

So, it is the nature which we often call the ‘jungle raaj’.  The idea of ‘jungle raaj’ conveys the idea of lack of justice in the human world.  It is interesting to see why man thinks that his world is more just, as compared to the world of nature. Here is a glimpse of the life of the jungle, which human beings often denounce. The big fish eat the small fish. The powerful kill the less powerful. This is what happens in the jungle and even in oceans and the same thing happens in the world of men too. But, the point of departure between the two worlds arrives soon, and I wonder if we can really accuse the world of nature as a land of lawlessness.

The Order of Nature

The order that we find in nature is far more powerful and more established than in the human world. Birds, animals are born with a default understanding of their role. Just imagine, they have no schools. It is only the human being who needs training in schools. And, we need worship places to teach us how to pray and remain connected to the creator, whereas animals are always in a state of prayer. A Punjabi poet, Prof. Puran Singh finds the buffaloes and calves [animals on their fours] always in a state of prostration.  Animals and birds have no liquor shops, they do not have ‘bars’, they do not have rave parties, they do not molest women. And most of everything, have you come across any murder in the forest?

In the forest, which we call the ‘jungel raaj’, there are killings. The big animals eat away the smaller animals. In fact, most of the birds are non-vegetarian. They eat up smaller insects. But nobody raises any and cry. Because it is their way of life. There are no murders as I said, no police stations, no violation of rights. There are no courts to ensure justice. Only we human beings need courts of justice because the human world thrives on injustice. Murders take place in the human world only.  The jungle has no underworld. They have no armies. No weapons dump. We have never seen them fighting pitched battles as men have done in the past over land for oil or resources.

Nature is a repository of sense and wisdom. Jungle is far more composed and balanced in its attitude towards life. They do not attack humans. Only humans have assaulted and molested the vegetation and the trees.

In fact, for the human world, ‘jungle raaj’ refers to the lack of justice and fairness, and a world which is given to crime. The fact is that the world of the jungle is the real world of nature where the law of the creator, the original laws are in operation. Man, with his greed and weapons, has created a world of crime which he equates with the ‘jungle raaj’. In my opinion, we denigrate the jungle in order to establish our superiority, whereas the facts prove it otherwise.

The final truth about the law of the jungle and the law of man’s land is a comparison between a sense of live and let live, and a passion for greed and exploitation and ultimate elimination of the other. The jungle ‘raaj’ is original and superior, whereas man’s laws are artificial and inferior, if not altogether infernal.

Read: Reforming the Young Minds

_________________________

Hailing from Chandigarh, India, the author is Laureate of Seneca Award, Charter of Morava, Franz Kafka and Maxim Gorky Awards, and President, International Academy of Ethics

The post The Jungle Dares the World of Crime first appeared on Sindh Courier.

• We have to impart them love for mankind, love for nature, love for the creator, love for parents, and love humanity at large.

Dr. Jernail Singh Anand

Men and mischief go together

Since times immemorial, education has been looked upon as a parallel training for a growing up human mind, and it is about how to live in the world, and how to connect back to the source of life. It is unfortunate that men, when die, leave all their wisdom or follies behind, and they take nothing with them, except their plain spirit, which is then subjected to close scrutiny and awarded or punished as per divine parameters. This world would have been far better if men who are born to this earth also carried their former wisdom and did not have to start afresh.

In fact, it appears humanity is not a straight upward progression. Gods are trying on human versions. How different men tackle the same problems, obviously, differently, and this helps gods to understand the variety of problems in human life, and make a repository of human wisdom which shows how situations can be handled in different ways. Humanity can be seen as soft versions of truth and untruth which keep intersecting in complex combinations.

As such, progression of human civilization is only a hit and trial for gods, who deny them acquired wisdom, and resend them on the earth, with only original wisdom, and then see if men have made any tangible progress in being human. But, it appears, they are disappointed and disillusioned too in the capability of mankind to emerge from their inherent weaknesses and accomplish something of value.

What we consider of great value, the hi tech trains, aeroplanes, and AI etc. are no match for the ingenuity of gods, because all these things put together, have further diminished the size of man in the eyes of the angels.  Angels judge men, not by their intelligence, but by their wisdom in making this world a better place. Intelligence is mostly directed towards one’s own wellbeing. Men never look beyond their nose. Whatever they are doing is amiss in the eyes of gods. Is it that all the educational edifice, the complex web of universities, colleges, gurus and ‘ghantals’, [high flown teachers] have failed to rise  to the expectations of gods?

If gods are not happy with men, if they are irritated with nonstop debates and seminars, it is because people have lost their control over natural language of the body, and they have to use language which they have mastered how to miscarry. They have tried to make fool of the gods who have realized at the end that men and mischief go together. All the knowledge is born out of mischief. People who study theology and mysticism, are like teachers who have taught Poetry for forty years, without writing a poem themselves.

The Blues

Where has education lagged? First of all, the declared aims of the people at the helm were suspect. If it was Macaulay, by now we people know it well, he wanted only ‘babus’ to take dictation from English masters. And second purpose was to paste English culture over the minds of young Indians. Even today, we name our schools after ‘Convent’ etc. English and Italian names of colonies, and companies, point to only one thing. We have no pride in our own culture. We feel inferior and that is why when we have to teach Poetry, we quote Keats. We have no Indian authors at hand to quote, as if there are no poets of substance in our own country.

While Macaulay’s model was defective, still it gave us great scholars who spearheaded the struggle for freedom. But, as times are moving ahead, we find the intellectual quotient of the people is giving way and the idea of acceptance, discussion has taken the back seat. Indian scholarship today believes in dictums, and ideological struggles and independence of thought and speech is under grave erosion.

Education should have created a corps of people who believe in goodness, fairness, justice and honesty. It is nowhere near this ideal. On the other hand, we have taught success, and push-ahead syndrome to our students. Finally, the kind of society that we come across, is one in which only money matters, power matters, wealth matters, and all types of crimes flourish.

If a man is properly educated, how can he become a criminal? How can Universities sell degrees, and how can doctors sell kidneys? How can professionals sell secrets, and corporates reduce the people to paupers and make high business profits?  If a student gets the degree of an IT professional, he migrates to USA, and there, his only passion is to attain great success. These accomplishments are good, but do they have any relevance to the country they belong to? How they connect themselves to the nation of their origin? Going beyond nationalities, I wish to underscore the idea that every professional is not an individual skyscraper. He belongs to a society, a family, and milieu, which he must serve. Accomplishments without this service dimension are acts of absolute selfishness, and isolate the man from the cosmic responsibility.

Cosmic Responsibility

As a cosmic citizen, everyone must feel connected to his society, to his family and, of course, to gods if he is not an atheist. Our education teaches us in a thousand ways what we should do to succeed in life, and universities give us degrees on the basis of which, we can get jobs. Now that you are equipped with the art of earning money, so that you could remain alive, the society wants your body and your mind for its incomplete jobs. Where are you? It waits but there is no response from our top rankers.

What Not to Do

When I was learning car driving, my driver was an old military man. Ordinarily, the trainers tell you to save the car from a brick lying on the road. But he would ask me to let the tyre hit the brick.  He said, if you know how to hit it, you will also know how to save your car from it.

From this story, I come to the conclusion that teachers and educators should teach their students what not to do in their lives. This is very important. In the past, when we went to a doctor, he would give us medicine, but at the same time, he would tell us what not to eat, because indiscriminate eating could aggravate the malaise and render the effect of his medicine useless. But now, doctors take care to prescribe medicine, [in order to inflate bills] and, if you do not force, the doctor won’t tell what not to eat. Naturally, it ensures your visits to the doctor.

Same thing happens to our educators. They don’t tell the students what they should not do. For the benefit of the readers, let me state a few don’ts. Others you can think of yourself.

Don’t cross your limits. Don’t cheat anybody. Don’t make false claims. Don’t do anything for which your conscience stops you. Don’t think of success as your ultimate career. Never use ulterior means for success. Never tell lies, even to yourself. Never think of breaking the law. Never go into marriage till you understand the idea of marriage. Never go for matrimonial ads. Never look for a partner who is rich. And so on.

If we want a better world, we need to work on these ideas. Education of young minds means we have to make them into decent human beings with minds which do not think amiss. We have to impart them love for mankind, love for nature, love for the creator, love for parents, and love humanity at large. Every student, when emerges from the University education, should swear by honesty, fairness, and goodness. It should be inscribed on the degrees as a solemn pledge.  If we are not doing so, we are responsible for criminalizing this society.

Read: Re-architecting history on plank of goodness

________________________

Hailing from Chandigarh, India, the author is Laureate of Seneca Award, Charter of Morava, Franz Kafka and Maxim Gorky Awards, and President, International Academy of Ethics

The post Reforming the Young Minds first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Dr. Jernail Singh Anand

How sons and daughters should be brought up, parents are very touchy in this matter. They use all their powers, even if they have to go for loans, to offer them a world of surety and security. They cannot be faulted in their passion to make all the provisions for the happy stay of their offspring. But some obvious facts that we have to contend with are that the over-protected and pampered sons and daughters of the rich are worst examples of humanity. They have power and wealth which they squander and make life difficult for people who want to live life with dignity.

If a father is a great painter, can he make his son too a painter, and at that, great too like him? A business man can bequeath his organization to his son, but has he made the son equal to the task he is going to inherit? We see great organizations and establishments which disappeared when they passed into the hands of crafty or craft-less offspring. We have this equation before us: Wealthy parents have sons and daughters who squander wealth, and prove good for nothing and the establishment crumbles as soon as the father is gone. We also have another equation. When the parents are financially weak, and suffer indignities in society because of their poverty, the sons and daughters work hard, and rise to high positions. These are far better specimens of humanity, who have seen poverty and who have struggled hard to gain position in society.

Creating Artificial Scarcity

I feel every father who has wealth should not lavish it on his son or daughter. He must create an artificial scarcity for them. Let them feel the pinch, and work hard. There is nothing bad in it if he sends his son to work and earn his livelihood, so that he knows the value of being useful to society, and learns the art of living with others. This is a world society which we all inherit, and we must know how to share this commonwealth of joy and pain, which are shared for us all. We cannot create young men and women who know everything of plenty, and have no knowledge of penury.

When I see fathers doting on their sons, and mothers killing their daughters, I feel how sinful we are. We are not ourselves, we are a part of human society, where we are expected to add to its well-being. If we are centered on our self, or our family, it is a foolish exercise. And it is being practised on an astronomical scale. Parents are worried only about their sons, and little less for their daughters, provide them every joy, every amenity. So far so good. But what is the result of this doting? Particularly, for the society in which we are living? We are giving to society men and women with twisted sensibilities, men who could not grow to their potential, people who were made to choose to be parasites.

If a man has to work hard in life, face many struggles, and suffer so many wants and losses, he becomes humble and wise too. But, when he stops all these forces of correction from his son, and gives him a protective atmosphere, it means that son will never rise to those heights to which his father had risen. When we stop our sons and daughters from facing rough weather, [to an extent, it can be excused] but in order to make them men and women in the real sense, so that they could develop their own capabilities to the maximum, they need to be in the ocean as an independent entity.

Protection destroys their potential. You can just cast a look around and see, how my kids who are under protection, they have to be helped in getting jobs, in staying in jobs, and cannot take independent decisions. It is parasitism of the worst kind. Parents must realize their duty towards their sons and daughters. It is poverty of wisdom and foresight if we end up scuttling their progress and growth as human beings, which is a cumulative loss to human society.

Read: Fight to Endure, Gift to Others

________________________

Hailing from Chandigarh, India, The author is Laureate of Seneca Award, Charter of Morava, Franz Kafka and Maxim Gorky Awards, and President, International Academy of Ethics

The post Nurturing Generations: Parents’ Duty to Society first appeared on Sindh Courier.