The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA)

-
The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) , introduced in 2005 by the Ministry of Rural Development , is one of the world's largest work guarantee programs.  It aims to strengthen livelihood security in rural areas by providing 100 days of assured wage employment each year to adult members of rural households willing to engage in unskilled manual labor. This initiative plays a vital role in promoting economic stability, empowering communities, and fostering sustainable development across India's rural landscape. The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) stands as a monumental testament to India's commitment to social welfare and rural empowerment. Enacted in 2005, this groundbreaking initiative has evolved into one of the most significant pillars of support for rural populations across the country. Imagine a program that guarantees 100 days of wage employment annually to adult members of rural households—this is not jus...
Post a Comment

Why is Buddhism is less popular in India

-
There are several reasons why Buddhism is less popular in India, despite having originated there. 

1. Revival of Hinduism: After the decline ofBuddhism in India in the 12th century, Hinduism experienced a revival under the Gupta Empire. This led to a cultural renaissance of Hinduism and a consequent decline in Buddhism.

2. Cultural and linguistic barriers: Buddhism wasthe Mauryan Empire, Hinduism experienced a revival under the Gupta Empire. This led to a decline in Buddhism's popularity as it was viewed as a rival religion. Hinduism became the dominant religion of India, and Buddhism faced significant opposition from it.

2. Islamic Conquest: In the 7th century, Islamic conquests began in India, which led to the destruction of many Buddhist monasteries and temples. Many Buddhists were forced to convert to Islam, and this significantly impacted Buddhism's popularity in India.

3. Buddhist Scriptures Written in Pali: The Buddhist scriptures were written in Pali, a language that was not native to India. This factor created a linguistic and cultural barrier that made Buddhism less accessible to the common people.

4. Buddhist Philosophy vs. Hinduism: Buddhism and Hinduism differ significantly in their philosophical beliefs. For instance, Buddhism rejects the concept of the soul and considers everything to be impermanent, whereas Hinduism believes in the existence of an individual soul that is permanent. This distinction created a challenge for Buddhists to convert Hindus.

5. Modernization: In the modern era, India has experienced significant social and economic changes, leading to a rise in materialism. Buddhism's emphasis on non-attachment and minimalism did not seem aligned with the aspirations of the contemporary Indian population.

Overall, these factors contributed to the decline of Buddhism's popularity in India over the centuries. While it remains an important religion elsewhere in the world, Buddhists make up less than 1% of India's population.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is the Sanctity of Parliamentary Debate, Which Lies at the Core of Democratic Decision-Making, Being Compromised?

-
From the historical view where the core of parliamentary debates was based on public welfare, the utilitarianism principle where every individual was very much aware of being responsible for his/her words towards the public, their actions and reactions were under the basic rule. The decorum of parliament was maintained and the politicians were public servants thinking of a collective decision where the core value was to take a step in the public welfare way. Thinking of that era when like-minded people were making decisions for a common vision that was devoted to a well-developed nation as a whole. But if we talk about today's debates they sound to be senseless.   Fighting with the elders, breaking public property, unethical slogans, and quotations to put-down the individual's public and private image is not at all the act of the responsible member of parliament. The core value is dying with the baseless debates where logical thinking and analytical norms are missing. There wa...
Read more

‘India had parliamentary institutions when people of Europe were mere nomads’

-
Image
The quote by  Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, "India had parliamentary institutions when people of Europe were mere nomads,"  is a powerful testament to the ancient civilization's early advancements in governance and societal structures. It speaks volumes about the historical context of India's political systems, which were far more developed than often recognized in the common Eurocentric narrative of history. This essay will delve into the implications of Ambedkar's statement, exploring its historical accuracy, its significance in the context of Indian pride and identity, and its relevance in contemporary discussions about the origins and evolution of democratic institutions. Firstly, various historical records and scholarly research support the assertion that India had parliamentary institutions in ancient times. The 'sabha' and 'samiti' of the Vedic period, for instance, are indicative of consultative assemblies that played a role in governance. These bodie...
Read more

Dr. D.C. Wadhwa & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors. case of 1986

-
 The Dr. D.C. Wadhwa & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors. case of 1986 is a cornerstone in the Indian judicial history, highlighting the delicate balance of power between the executive and legislative branches of government . The case stemmed from a practice that had become routine for the Bihar government: the re-promulgation of ordinances without legislative approval, a process that Dr. D.C. Wadhwa, an economics professor, found to be a subversion of democratic principles . The Supreme Court's decision in this case was a resounding affirmation of constitutional law and its supremacy over executive convenience. By declaring the practice of re-promulgating ordinances without legislative consent as unconstitutional, the court reinforced the necessity of legislative scrutiny and the impermanence of ordinances, which are meant to be emergency measures, not a backdoor for enacting laws. This landmark judgment serves as a reminder of the importance of checks and balances within ...
Read more