eSign Word for Procurement Now
Make the most out of your eSignature workflows with airSlate SignNow
Extensive suite of eSignature tools
Discover the easiest way to eSign Word for Procurement Now with our powerful tools that go beyond eSignature. Sign documents and collect data, signatures, and payments from other parties from a single solution.
Robust integration and API capabilities
Enable the airSlate SignNow API and supercharge your workspace systems with eSignature tools. Streamline data routing and record updates with out-of-the-box integrations.
Advanced security and compliance
Set up your eSignature workflows while staying compliant with major eSignature, data protection, and eCommerce laws. Use airSlate SignNow to make every interaction with a document secure and compliant.
Various collaboration tools
Make communication and interaction within your team more transparent and effective. Accomplish more with minimal efforts on your side and add value to the business.
Enjoyable and stress-free signing experience
Delight your partners and employees with a straightforward way of signing documents. Make document approval flexible and precise.
Extensive support
Explore a range of video tutorials and guides on how to eSign Word for Procurement Now. Get all the help you need from our dedicated support team.
How To Add Sign in eSignPay
Keep your eSignature workflows on track
Make the signing process more streamlined and uniform
Take control of every aspect of the document execution process. eSign, send out for signature, manage, route, and save your documents in a single secure solution.
Add and collect signatures from anywhere
Let your customers and your team stay connected even when offline. Access airSlate SignNow to eSign Word for Procurement Now from any platform or device: your laptop, mobile phone, or tablet.
Ensure error-free results with reusable templates
Templatize frequently used documents to save time and reduce the risk of common errors when sending out copies for signing.
Stay compliant and secure when eSigning
Use airSlate SignNow to eSign Word for Procurement Now and ensure the integrity and security of your data at every step of the document execution cycle.
Enjoy the ease of setup and onboarding process
Have your eSignature workflow up and running in minutes. Take advantage of numerous detailed guides and tutorials, or contact our dedicated support team to make the most out of the airSlate SignNow functionality.
Benefit from integrations and API for maximum efficiency
Integrate with a rich selection of productivity and data storage tools. Create a more encrypted and seamless signing experience with the airSlate SignNow API.
Collect signatures
24x
faster
Reduce costs by
$30
per document
Save up to
40h
per employee / month
Our user reviews speak for themselves
-
Best ROI. Our customers achieve an average 7x ROI within the first six months.
-
Scales with your use cases. From SMBs to mid-market, airSlate SignNow delivers results for businesses of all sizes.
-
Intuitive UI and API. Sign and send documents from your apps in minutes.
A smarter way to work: —how to industry sign banking integrate
FAQs
-
What surprised you about the Indian government's budget presented by Nirmala Sitharaman?
What surprised you about the Indian government's budget presented by Nirmala Sitharaman?Completly awestruck by the way, Nirmala Sithraman started by her maiden budget by telling Purananooru.Purananooru is a Tamil work made by Pisiranthayar. She said a verse from it and asked meaning for it from DMK lads. Since they don’t know meaning they smiled and Madam Nirmala Sithraman explains it.Now this is where Anti-DMK kannis get happy. They are so happy that DMK didn’t answer. But wait, what’s the truth? Our Nirmala Mam has practised it 4 times and mugged it up so that she can present it before her budget. Fact is, without memorizing nobody knows the meaning. You go to a random tamil guy ask them the meaning, they will simply look at you like anything because they are Tamils, not Tamil scholars.Fine, second part. 1% cess on fuels. Madam knows where to hit the middle class. In their stomach and day to day usage. Already, the petrol price touched 89–90 last year and this year since BJP is so poor to afford for the poor, they kept their hands in middle class stomach. An average middle class man spends 2–3 k for petrol and now it will hurt him more because the extra 1 cess is per one liter. We are already paying 100% as tax on petrol and now extra 1% cess. BJP fanboy says “I’m ready to pay if it is for the poor”. You pay why should we? We are already paying enough taxes to the government in the name of income tax, professional tax, road tax, entertainment tax. Please introduce tax for pooping more than 3 times a day too because since you hit us in the stomach, this will also help the poor.So these taxes are not enough?I put petrol for rupees 200 and it lasts for 2 days. I use it to go to my office,class and all those stuff. “Please use government buses” - BJP fanboys. Do you know how the buses are here? Do you know how much crowded it gets? Why should I bear more pain? An average middle class man gets hit a lot by these people because of their budget. Already we are paying 100’s of taxes and we don’t know what the government does because the roads are still shit. It is full of potholes and we can’t even drive. We pay road tax when we buy a vechicle and the we pay road tax in petrol and finally the roads are like hell. It is difficult to get a job and we get a job and finally you take professional tax and income tax.It is hard to buy jewels these days for marriage and for a normal middle class to get 20 or 30 soveriegns of gold for their daughter’s marriage will now be a dream because additional tax on Gold too. Already the gold is extremely high and now this. When will the government focus on middle class? So the rich will get richer and the poor will become poorer.Irony is that it was you people who came to power saying that Congress is keeping hands in people’s activites and now you are doing this. Remember how you protested? What is this hypocrisy?.(Image source : Google)Fine, after all we middle class can only talk. You can easily make us anti-national.This is a failed budget and this will create massive impacts and many jobs will be surely lost because of this.I think they will keep hands on RBI and borrow money from them !Edit 1 :Answer to Why did no one talk about the massive layoffs happening in the Indian manufacturing industries during the 2019 Lok Sabha elections? by Navin Niish (நவீன் நீஷ்) Navin Niish (நவீன் நீஷ்)'s answer to Why did no one talk about the massive layoffs happening in the Indian manufacturing industries during the 2019 Lok Sabha elections?Inflation, Cheap internet pricesWait what?Can you eat internet? keep facebook as side dish?Inflation is there and prices are rising - is it under control? NoFor example :loads and loads of stuff are risen including vegetable oils, sunflower oilsIn 2014 - gold winner was 70 rupees now it is 94All the necessary items have risen up.For instance in 2011 and 2012 - 9000 was sufficient to run my family now 80k is not sufficient because of increase of pricesThere is no jobsAuto sector is dead Million Jobs In Danger: Priyanka Gandhi Slams "BJP Government's Silence"These five factors have created painful downturn for India’s automobile industrySlowdown in auto sales: 10-15% people lost jobs in auto component industryAgricultural sector is dyingIndia lost 11 million jobs in 2018, rural areas worst hit: CMIEThey say Jobs are being created but where is the actual data there is nothing happening.Jet airways - deadBSNL - deadHAL - will die soonThe government is not focusing on public sectorsPeople are just happy with a failed budget.NO new IIM’s or IIT’sNo 33% proposed women reservationConstruction sector is already dead and no jobs for civil engineers.Where is this going?People are busy fighting over Jai Shri RamPeople are busy with lynchingPeople are busy with justifyingWe don’t care because we want hindu nationalism and ram rajya than development.I want Hindu nationalism and Ram Rajya too but without development and no improvement they are purely garbageChanging the names of cities can be accepted if they change the way the people’s living standardsManmohan Singh vs Narendra Modi: The real India growth storyIndia clocked 10.08 per cent growth under Manmohan Singh's tenure: ReportNow with the RTI bill we can’t even know what the government is doing.I’m very happy to support one of the finest governments under Narendra Modi but loads of things are there and they are alarming.Edit 2 :I think they will keep hands on RBI and borrow money from them ! - I predicted it !!!!!
-
The Supreme court overruled the Government and said the leaked Rafale documents are admissible during investigations but Rahul G
We need to understand this question, not only from point of view of two ( Supreme Court and Rahul Gandhi) but from that of four, the supreme court, Rahul Gandhi, Narendra Modi and citizens.When Supreme Court ruled that it won't go into prices of Rafale but the decision making process of the government, it found decision making process an appropriate. This order was on one of the petition.By another review petition, when the petitioners placed before the court certain secret documents which were published by N Ram of The Hindu newspaper, the government told court that since these documents are stolen, they shouldn't be relied upon. The government said it would order criminal proceedings under official Secret Act which later they cancelled. The Hon Court has now unanimously held that these leaked documents would be held as an admissible evidence. This means, Rafale proceedings are still going on and matter is subjudiced.I have gone through the speech of Rahul Gandhi. In first part he said. Mr Narendra Modi, before media, had claimed clean cheat. Frankly, his supporters on Quora too had celebrated the clean chit.In second part of interview, Rahul Gandhi said the court found Mr. Modi guilty of corruption.Both Mr. Modi and Rahul Gandhi are wrong. Neither the court has given clean chit to Mr. Modi as claimed by Mr Modi nor found Mr Modi guilty as claimed by Mr Rahul Gandhi. Thats politics.What legal position exist as of now, is that Rafale case has been again reopened by the Supreme Court. This opinion could be treated as opinion of neutral citizens.
-
Which medium multirole fighter aircraft should India opt for in order to replace the existing MIG-21's?
Look at the above picture.The Gripen E is not under one flag, It’s parts are imported from OEMs based in:USA(Substantially High)GermanyBritainCzech RepublicCanadaSouth AfricaSo all major IPRs are hold by these foreign OEMs which signifies the following:India has to negotiate with following OEMs outside sweden for ToT.It’s not possible to negotiate with all of them for ToT and manufacturing line also all these OEMs will agree for ToT is not a cent percent probability either, which signifies that the so called “Advance Manufacturing Facility” in India will be a Final assembly line just like Rafale , something we have been doing for past 6 decades or so.The Biggest Fool we are being made of is that Gripen-E isn’t even ready yet, Gripen-E had it’s maiden flight last month. I was astonished by excitement created by Indians on prototype flying, had it been Tejas, defence blogs, journalist had been filling pages to prove it’s piece of $hit. But that’s not case for Gripen, Shows typical “Gora skin Superior syndrome” mentality prevalent in India society, nevertheless back to topic. This proves two things:Gripen-E is neither battle Proven, criteria which we indians often try to impose on indigenous weapons to prove them inferior.Nor is it ready. It’s still a prototype.Gripen is in similar condition to Eurofighter typhoon in MMRCA deal.F-16 on the contrary defies all these logics, though it has it’s fare share of complexities as stated below:If some recent news is to be trusted then F-16 or Gripen both have got some more challenge from IAF:“Recent media reports say that a Senior Test Pilots of Indian Air Force hit out at Modi government on India flirting with ideas to procure either F-16 and Gripen-E of which both had failed under MMRCA technical trials hints at discord in Indian Air Force regarding the purchase of Single-engine fighter jet tender. Unnamed Senior Test Pilot of Indian Air Force who was part of Original MMRCA technical trials where both F-16IN and Gripen NG failed miserable called F-16 as Obsolete in terms of technology and growth potential of the air frame already has signNowed its peak a decade back and current offer of ” Block 70 ” is just glorified Block 50/52 Air frame with Block 60 Techs. Test Pilot also confirmed that Lockheed Martin technical deficiencies highlighted by Indian Air Force in detail after MMRCA technical trials are still not been addressed yet by the OEM and Limited technical trials which IAF plans to carry out to check same technical performance shortfalls recorded in last trials will again expose this deficiency in technical parameters. The pilot also lambasted Saab’s Gripen-E and added that Gripen-E is still uncompleted aircraft and carries many prototype equipment which is still under testing stages and it will take some time before aircraft will gain full operational status while airframe limitations of the aircraft will still presists to overcome failures recorded under MMRCA technical trials. Many Defence Analysts have criticised Government for flirting with ideas to build F-16s in India when the world over F-16s are been retired due to technological limitations. Analysts have hit out at the government since any order for F-16s could purely be to create a business opportunity for certain government friendly Industrial giants in India who are making a foray in defence sector to fulfil PM Modi’s ” Make In India ” in the Defence sector. Another section of Defence Analysts has also criticized Government for ignoring Homegrown fighter aircraft like LCA-Tejas MKII and 5th Generation AMCA Projects which are still in drawing board due to lack of commitment and support shown by the present government. Purchase of F-16 or Gripen can have serious implication for India’s Tejas MKII which analysts believe could be scrapped in favor of additional orders for this jet in future.”(footnote: http://idrw.org/iaf-test-pilots-... .)Even if I suppose this report is fake still there are many questions that questions this deal itself.Further,Lets start one by one from all recent interviews and articles from LM representative and Westerrn Defense analysts:“India traditionally drives a hard bargain for technology transfers or demand expansive offsets that the US will unlikely concede such as state-of-the-art engine, AESA, and other technologies. Rather than drive a traditional Indian bargain on these items for the sake of tightly controlled and restricted licenses, by getting their foot in the door with the F-16IN program, India can indigenously develop many marketable add-ons, upgrades, and system integration that do not compete with offerings US firms.”(http://www.indiandefensenews.in/...)Now i don’t think atleast without AESA radar the deal is going to get signed if “Make in India” is truly be considered.“India operate the biggest fleet of Russian/Soviet fighters in the world, and is a major operator (one of the biggest after France) of French fighters. No one, presently, have the capability and motive to network these planes together into a combat cloud. To do so, they have to have the combination of critical mass (units operating or on order), experience operating / supporting them, technological base, and incentive / motive to do so. Chinese or Russians are not going to network US or European planes. French will do US/European, but not Russian or Chinese gear. US can integrate European (including French), but will not work on Russian or Chinese kit. Countries that do operate or intend to buy large fleets of European, American and Russian aircraft like Saudi Arabia, UAE or Iran do not have the technical capability of India in software and communications, the familiarity and logistical support of having operated aircraft from Europe, Russia/USSR, and USA when the F-16 deal goes through.Israel in theory have the technical capability, but not the critical mass or the motive to do so without an export customer. For Israeli arms makers, amortizing the cost over one customer (except India) is difficult when India can do much of the work themselves.Beyond this is integration of aircraft, there is the problem of mating platforms into resources from space to air to sea and undersea. i.e. air defense systems, command and control networks, land or sea based SAMs and ECM resources, etc. which hardly anyone is interested in working with the hodgepodge of older gear that India has in abundance and is familiar with.”Now SU-30 is to be the mainstay of IAF for atleast 2 decades or so. So, if uncle sam is not interested in networking the F-16 with russian a/c or even weapons that might be turn off for The lion of Make in india.“The wording of the deal which was signed at the Paris Air Show is very clear—it states only the “intent to partner together to meet India’s Make-in-India requirement through the establishment of an F-16 production line in India”. The most obvious takeaway from this is that the deal is not a firm agreement to manufacture the F-16 in India, but only a letter of intent to assemble the plane in India if and when the Indian Air Force (IAF) chooses that platform.The downside of this, for India, is that by some estimates, less than 40% of the F-16 is actually Lockheed technology. The remaining 60% is proprietary technology owned by hundreds of sub-systems manufacturers spread across the globe. This means that about 60% of the F-16 technology remains unavailable to India unless its signs deals with each of the hundreds and possibly thousands of sub-component manufacturers, some of whom are based in countries like Turkey that are less than enthusiastic about India.The F-16 engine, for example, belongs to another US company: General Electric. Its core crystal-blade technology is off limits to even the closest US allies. Also, given the slow growth of new engines globally and considering that India’s stated aim is to become a competitor, it hardly suits GE’s business interests to transfer such technology to India.”If all above three points are considered than this deal doesn’t sound much different than Indo-Russia SU-30 deal. Then for a similar deal it makes no sense to strain the decades long Indo-Russian relationship.Here comes the LM representatives kicker:”FP: Do they have to be engineers? Lockheed: No, I mean people who have been trained through an ITI or equivalent technical training institution with a diploma. That’s a large amount of the workforce and it’s pretty similar in the US also. Then you need entry level engineers, designers, supply chain managers, software engineers, hardware engineers, supply chain integrators, business people - the whole spectrum. You also need skilled technicians and engineers for testing the systems, the worthiness of the aircraft itself. You start with technician level and then you have people at all of these levels. You would need systems engineers and industrial engineers who understand process flow and production line - so various kinds of engineers at every level and business managers who can understand both the flow of equipment and flow of money. This is like bringing up a whole new industry. Working with a company like TATA and TASL means they already have a lot of the processes understood which is a big benefit.”(F-16: What It Takes To Build This Fighter Plane In India)Only ITI and production facility based engineers, an production facility which being from the leading manufacturer will be atleast 50% if not less automated, raises questions:How many jobs for a automated facility like this? even if you say it will have the entire production facility and not just final assembly.What about R&D? as nothing mentioned about researchers, PHDWhy change of plans by LM about making India” the only manufacturer” to transferring only texas line to India and making india “one of the many manufacturer” needs to be addressed? Is this done to keep Pakistan safe or better word “to keep the Pakistani market safe.”INFERENCE:1.Whosoever wins, it’s not going to help much about the ongoing indigenous projects, probability may be it can curtail them.SAAB has only one strong point for TOT GaAn AESA radar, unfortunately that point too is diluted after DRDO has came up with the theory of same and IISC Bangalore starting it’s own GaAN manufacturing furnance. The only way it helps is India gets a private aerospace assembly line.2.The so called propaganda of ToT telling that it should be so signNow that it can be used to create India’s own fighter, or say India’s own LM/SAAB, forget it, no sane OEM will create a competitor of it’s own, So better get A$$ out of couch and start spending on R&D, there are no shortcuts.3.It’s always not just the technical aspects but the political advantage you gain with such mega deals, Gripen has nothing to offer on this aspect tooCOCLUSIONS:A> Logic prevails: F-16 winsB> Friendship prevails: Gripen winsMY CONCLUSION: You can spend 18 damn Bn $ on a foreign fighter, your pen stops writting when allocating funds to LCA. I would personally favour LCA Mk-2 over both considering each and every above mentioned aspect anyday.Thanks for A2A.EDIT 1(TO Gaurav Verma ):According to your logic if he have to favour Adani or Ambani he would have aked them to invest in their company instead of Kaveri.I don’t understand why people in India hate Bussinesmens, the word Baniya is used as derogatory remark like we are doing some crime by earning profits. If this mentality doesn’t change and Indian govt contined trying models of commumist states in our democracy we will get results like Venezuel not China.I never told i hate businesses or businessman. I have serious reservation against just Adani . I will explain:Look at the below given picture:You know what this is?This is DPP-2016 CHAPTER-7: The Strategic Partnership ModelThe following are the criterias for an SP:1.Financial capability.2.Technology capability for Heavy Engineering manufacturing.Adani group is in a great deal of Debt already.Adani group doesn’t have any experience in Heavy Engineeering manufacturing let alone defense.KSSL, Mahindra Aerospace, L&T defence, TATA(Also Dyanamatic technologies) are in either Aerospace/heavy engineering manufacturing or both businesses for more than a decade now also Ambani have been operating RDEL since 1997.When there is a student working hard for years for a upcoming exam and suddenly a friend of examiner is selected for next round w/o giving exam, how will you feel?Then how will you quantify the fact that a SP was allowed fairly even defying all the given points in SP?Choice is yours!
-
If India chooses to produce a foreign fighter jet in India with all agreements from the manufacturer and to be inducted in IAF,
NONE OR RAFALE AT THE BEST.REASONS:WHY NOT GRIPEN?ANS:Look at the above picture.The Gripen E is not under one flag, It’s parts are imported from OEMs based in:USA(Substantially High)GermanyBritainCzech RepublicCanadaSouth AfricaSo all major IPRs are hold by these foreign OEMs which signifies the following:India has to negotiate with following OEMs outside sweden for ToT.It’s not possible to negotiate with all of them for ToT and manufacturing line also all these OEMs will agree for ToT is not a cent percent probability either, which signifies that the so called “Advance Manufacturing Facility” in India will be a Final assembly line just like Rafale , something we have been doing for past 6 decades or so.The Biggest Fool we are being made of is that Gripen-E isn’t even ready yet, Gripen-E had it’s maiden flight last month. I was astonished by excitement created by Indians on prototype flying, had it been Tejas, defence blogs, journalist had been filling pages to prove it’s piece of $hit. But that’s not case for Gripen, Shows typical “Gora skin Superior syndrome” mentality prevalent in India society, nevertheless back to topic. This proves two things:Gripen-E is neither battle Proven, criteria which we indians often try to impose on indigenous weapons to prove them inferior.Nor is it ready. It’s still a prototype.Gripen is in similar condition to Eurofighter typhoon in MMRCA deal.I have serious reservation against just Adani . I will explain:Look at the below given picture:You know what this is?This is DPP-2016 CHAPTER-7: The Strategic Partnership ModelThe following are the criterias for an SP:1.Financial capability.2.Technology capability for Heavy Engineering manufacturing.Adani group is in a great deal of Debt already, it owes near to 9Bn$ to various state and private banks in this country, setting up business under so called “Make(read assemble) in India” will again ask for loans w/o paying previous humoungous debts.Adani group doesn’t have any experience in Heavy Engineeering manufacturing let alone defense.KSSL, Mahindra Aerospace, L&T defence, TATA(Also Dyanamatic technologies) are in either Aerospace/heavy engineering manufacturing or both businesses for more than a decade now also Ambani have been operating RDEL since 1997.When there is a student working hard for years for a upcoming exam and suddenly a friend of examiner is selected for next round w/o giving exam, how will you feel?Then how will you quantify the fact that a SP was allowed fairly even defying all the given points in SP?WHY NOT F-16?Short Answer:It is a “Old Man on Steroids”COMCASAUSIBC letter to MoD about unwillingness to share TOT.Then US pushing for Hypersonic tech proliferation act.Details:F-16 on the contrary defies some of these logics, though it has it’s fare share of complexities as stated below:If some recent news is to be trusted then F-16 or Gripen both have got some more challenge from IAF:“Recent media reports say that a Senior Test Pilots of Indian Air Force hit out at Modi government on India flirting with ideas to procure either F-16 and Gripen-E of which both had failed under MMRCA technical trials hints at discord in Indian Air Force regarding the purchase of Single-engine fighter jet tender. Unnamed Senior Test Pilot of Indian Air Force who was part of Original MMRCA technical trials where both F-16IN and Gripen NG failed miserable called F-16 as Obsolete in terms of technology and growth potential of the air frame already has signNowed its peak a decade back and current offer of ” Block 70 ” is just glorified Block 50/52 Air frame with Block 60 Techs. Test Pilot also confirmed that Lockheed Martin technical deficiencies highlighted by Indian Air Force in detail after MMRCA technical trials are still not been addressed yet by the OEM and Limited technical trials which IAF plans to carry out to check same technical performance shortfalls recorded in last trials will again expose this deficiency in technical parameters. The pilot also lambasted Saab’s Gripen-E and added that Gripen-E is still uncompleted aircraft and carries many prototype equipment which is still under testing stages and it will take some time before aircraft will gain full operational status while airframe limitations of the aircraft will still presists to overcome failures recorded under MMRCA technical trials. Many Defence Analysts have criticised Government for flirting with ideas to build F-16s in India when the world over F-16s are been retired due to technological limitations. Analysts have hit out at the government since any order for F-16s could purely be to create a business opportunity for certain government friendly Industrial giants in India who are making a foray in defence sector to fulfil PM Modi’s ” Make In India ” in the Defence sector. Another section of Defence Analysts has also criticized Government for ignoring Homegrown fighter aircraft like LCA-Tejas MKII and 5th Generation AMCA Projects which are still in drawing board due to lack of commitment and support shown by the present government. Purchase of F-16 or Gripen can have serious implication for India’s Tejas MKII which analysts believe could be scrapped in favor of additional orders for this jet in future.”(footnote: http://idrw.org/iaf-test-pilots-... .)Even if I suppose this report is fake still there are many questions that questions this deal itself.Further,Lets start one by one from all recent interviews and articles from LM representative and Westerrn Defense analysts:“India traditionally drives a hard bargain for technology transfers or demand expansive offsets that the US will unlikely concede such as state-of-the-art engine, AESA, and other technologies. Rather than drive a traditional Indian bargain on these items for the sake of tightly controlled and restricted licenses, by getting their foot in the door with the F-16IN program, India can indigenously develop many marketable add-ons, upgrades, and system integration that do not compete with offerings US firms.”(http://www.indiandefensenews.in/...)Now i don’t think atleast without AESA radar the deal is going to get signed if “Make in India” is truly be considered.“India operate the biggest fleet of Russian/Soviet fighters in the world, and is a major operator (one of the biggest after France) of French fighters. No one, presently, have the capability and motive to network these planes together into a combat cloud. To do so, they have to have the combination of critical mass (units operating or on order), experience operating / supporting them, technological base, and incentive / motive to do so. Chinese or Russians are not going to network US or European planes. French will do US/European, but not Russian or Chinese gear. US can integrate European (including French), but will not work on Russian or Chinese kit. Countries that do operate or intend to buy large fleets of European, American and Russian aircraft like Saudi Arabia, UAE or Iran do not have the technical capability of India in software and communications, the familiarity and logistical support of having operated aircraft from Europe, Russia/USSR, and USA when the F-16 deal goes through.Israel in theory have the technical capability, but not the critical mass or the motive to do so without an export customer. For Israeli arms makers, amortizing the cost over one customer (except India) is difficult when India can do much of the work themselves.Beyond this is integration of aircraft, there is the problem of mating platforms into resources from space to air to sea and undersea. i.e. air defense systems, command and control networks, land or sea based SAMs and ECM resources, etc. which hardly anyone is interested in working with the hodgepodge of older gear that India has in abundance and is familiar with.”Now SU-30 is to be the mainstay of IAF for atleast 2 decades or so. So, if uncle sam is not interested in networking the F-16 with russian a/c or even weapons that might be turn off for The lion of Make in india.“The wording of the deal which was signed at the Paris Air Show is very clear—it states only the “intent to partner together to meet India’s Make-in-India requirement through the establishment of an F-16 production line in India”. The most obvious takeaway from this is that the deal is not a firm agreement to manufacture the F-16 in India, but only a letter of intent to assemble the plane in India if and when the Indian Air Force (IAF) chooses that platform.The downside of this, for India, is that by some estimates, less than 40% of the F-16 is actually Lockheed technology. The remaining 60% is proprietary technology owned by hundreds of sub-systems manufacturers spread across the globe. This means that about 60% of the F-16 technology remains unavailable to India unless its signs deals with each of the hundreds and possibly thousands of sub-component manufacturers, some of whom are based in countries like Turkey that are less than enthusiastic about India.The F-16 engine, for example, belongs to another US company: General Electric. Its core crystal-blade technology is off limits to even the closest US allies. Also, given the slow growth of new engines globally and considering that India’s stated aim is to become a competitor, it hardly suits GE’s business interests to transfer such technology to India.”If all above three points are considered than this deal doesn’t sound much different than Indo-Russia SU-30 deal. Then for a similar deal it makes no sense to strain the decades long Indo-Russian relationship.Here comes the LM representatives kicker:”FP: Do they have to be engineers? Lockheed: No, I mean people who have been trained through an ITI or equivalent technical training institution with a diploma. That’s a large amount of the workforce and it’s pretty similar in the US also. Then you need entry level engineers, designers, supply chain managers, software engineers, hardware engineers, supply chain integrators, business people - the whole spectrum. You also need skilled technicians and engineers for testing the systems, the worthiness of the aircraft itself. You start with technician level and then you have people at all of these levels. You would need systems engineers and industrial engineers who understand process flow and production line - so various kinds of engineers at every level and business managers who can understand both the flow of equipment and flow of money. This is like bringing up a whole new industry. Working with a company like TATA and TASL means they already have a lot of the processes understood which is a big benefit.”(F-16: What It Takes To Build This Fighter Plane In India)Only ITI and production facility based engineers, an production facility which being from the leading manufacturer will be atleast 50% if not less automated, raises questions:How many jobs for a automated facility like this? even if you say it will have the entire production facility and not just final assembly.What about R&D? as nothing mentioned about researchers, PHDWhy change of plans by LM about making India” the only manufacturer” to transferring only texas line to India and making india “one of the many manufacturer” needs to be addressed? Is this done to keep Pakistan safe or better word “to keep the Pakistani market safe.”INFERENCE:1.Whosoever wins, it’s not going to help much about the ongoing indigenous projects, probability may be it can curtail them.SAAB has only one strong point for TOT GaAn AESA radar, unfortunately that point too is diluted after DRDO has came up with the theory of same and IISC Bangalore starting it’s own GaAN manufacturing furnance. The only way it helps is India gets a private aerospace assembly line.2.The so called propaganda of ToT telling that it should be so signNow that it can be used to create India’s own fighter, or say India’s own LM/SAAB, forget it, no sane OEM will create a competitor of it’s own, So better get A$$ out of couch and start spending on R&D, there are no shortcuts.COCLUSIONS:A> Logic prevails: More LCA and Rafales winsB> Friendship prevails:F-16/ Gripen winsMY CONCLUSION: You can spend 18 damn Bn $ on a foreign fighter, your pen stops writting when allocating funds to LCA. I would personally favour LCA Mk-2 over both considering each and every above mentioned aspect anyday.
-
Is our indigenous LCA Tejas program dead? Why is Lockheed Martin jointly building F-16 fighter planes in India with Tata Advance
Tejas LCA is far from dead. 123 are on order. Third assembly line money has been sanctioned by CCS and to be operational by 2019. Current production is ramping up.THE F-16 IS NOT THE DEAL. A SINGLE ENGINE FIGHTER IS THE DEAL. IT IS A GOVERNMENT TO GOVERMENT DEAL. NO DEAL HAS BEEN SIGNED AT THIS MOMENT EVEN WHEN PM MODI WAS IN USA RECENTLY. NO DEAL HAS BEEN SIGNED YET. NOR IT IS TO BE SIGNED ANY TIME SOON.(ATLEAST FOR SIX MONTHS).If some recent news is to be trusted then F-16 or Gripen both have got some more challenge from IAF:“Recent media reports say that a Senior Test Pilots of Indian Air Force hit out at Modi government on India flirting with ideas to procure either F-16 and Gripen-E of which both had failed under MMRCA technical trials hints at discord in Indian Air Force regarding the purchase of Single-engine fighter jet tender. Unnamed Senior Test Pilot of Indian Air Force who was part of Original MMRCA technical trials where both F-16IN and Gripen NG failed miserable called F-16 as Obsolete in terms of technology and growth potential of the air frame already has signNowed its peak a decade back and current offer of ” Block 70 ” is just glorified Block 50/52 Air frame with Block 60 Techs. Test Pilot also confirmed that Lockheed Martin technical deficiencies highlighted by Indian Air Force in detail after MMRCA technical trials are still not been addressed yet by the OEM and Limited technical trials which IAF plans to carry out to check same technical performance shortfalls recorded in last trials will again expose this deficiency in technical parameters. The pilot also lambasted Saab’s Gripen-E and added that Gripen-E is still uncompleted aircraft and carries many prototype equipment which is still under testing stages and it will take some time before aircraft will gain full operational status while airframe limitations of the aircraft will still presists to overcome failures recorded under MMRCA technical trials. Many Defence Analysts have criticised Government for flirting with ideas to build F-16s in India when the world over F-16s are been retired due to technological limitations. Analysts have hit out at the government since any order for F-16s could purely be to create a business opportunity for certain government friendly Industrial giants in India who are making a foray in defence sector to fulfil PM Modi’s ” Make In India ” in the Defence sector. Another section of Defence Analysts has also criticized Government for ignoring Homegrown fighter aircraft like LCA-Tejas MKII and 5th Generation AMCA Projects which are still in drawing board due to lack of commitment and support shown by the present government. Purchase of F-16 or Gripen can have serious implication for India’s Tejas MKII which analysts believe could be scrapped in favor of additional orders for this jet in future.”(footnote: http://idrw.org/iaf-test-pilots-... .)Even if I suppose this report is fake still there are many questions that questions this deal:Further,Lets start one by one from all recent interviews and articles from LM representative and Westerrn Defense analysts:“India traditionally drives a hard bargain for technology transfers or demand expansive offsets that the US will unlikely concede such as state-of-the-art engine, AESA, and other technologies. Rather than drive a traditional Indian bargain on these items for the sake of tightly controlled and restricted licenses, by getting their foot in the door with the F-16IN program, India can indigenously develop many marketable add-ons, upgrades, and system integration that do not compete with offerings US firms.”(http://www.indiandefensenews.in/...)Now i don’t think atleast without AESA radar the deal is going to get signed if “Make in India” is truly be considered.“India operate the biggest fleet of Russian/Soviet fighters in the world, and is a major operator (one of the biggest after France) of French fighters. No one, presently, have the capability and motive to network these planes together into a combat cloud. To do so, they have to have the combination of critical mass (units operating or on order), experience operating / supporting them, technological base, and incentive / motive to do so. Chinese or Russians are not going to network US or European planes. French will do US/European, but not Russian or Chinese gear. US can integrate European (including French), but will not work on Russian or Chinese kit. Countries that do operate or intend to buy large fleets of European, American and Russian aircraft like Saudi Arabia, UAE or Iran do not have the technical capability of India in software and communications, the familiarity and logistical support of having operated aircraft from Europe, Russia/USSR, and USA when the F-16 deal goes through.Israel in theory have the technical capability, but not the critical mass or the motive to do so without an export customer. For Israeli arms makers, amortizing the cost over one customer (except India) is difficult when India can do much of the work themselves.Beyond this is integration of aircraft, there is the problem of mating platforms into resources from space to air to sea and undersea. i.e. air defense systems, command and control networks, land or sea based SAMs and ECM resources, etc. which hardly anyone is interested in working with the hodgepodge of older gear that India has in abundance and is familiar with.”Now SU-30 is to be the mainstay of IAF for atleast 2 decades or so. So, if uncle sam is not interested in networking the F-16 with russian a/c or even weapons that might be turn off for The lion of Make in india.“The wording of the deal which was signed at the Paris Air Show is very clear—it states only the “intent to partner together to meet India’s Make-in-India requirement through the establishment of an F-16 production line in India”. The most obvious takeaway from this is that the deal is not a firm agreement to manufacture the F-16 in India, but only a letter of intent to assemble the plane in India if and when the Indian Air Force (IAF) chooses that platform.The downside of this, for India, is that by some estimates, less than 40% of the F-16 is actually Lockheed technology. The remaining 60% is proprietary technology owned by hundreds of sub-systems manufacturers spread across the globe. This means that about 60% of the F-16 technology remains unavailable to India unless its signs deals with each of the hundreds and possibly thousands of sub-component manufacturers, some of whom are based in countries like Turkey that are less than enthusiastic about India.The F-16 engine, for example, belongs to another US company: General Electric. Its core crystal-blade technology is off limits to even the closest US allies. Also, given the slow growth of new engines globally and considering that India’s stated aim is to become a competitor, it hardly suits GE’s business interests to transfer such technology to India.”If all above three points are considered than this deal doesn’t sound much different than Indo-Russia SU-30 deal. Then for a similar deal it makes no sense to strain the decades long Indo-Russian relationship.Here comes the LM representatives kicker:”FP: Do they have to be engineers? Lockheed: No, I mean people who have been trained through an ITI or equivalent technical training institution with a diploma. That’s a large amount of the workforce and it’s pretty similar in the US also. Then you need entry level engineers, designers, supply chain managers, software engineers, hardware engineers, supply chain integrators, business people - the whole spectrum. You also need skilled technicians and engineers for testing the systems, the worthiness of the aircraft itself. You start with technician level and then you have people at all of these levels. You would need systems engineers and industrial engineers who understand process flow and production line - so various kinds of engineers at every level and business managers who can understand both the flow of equipment and flow of money. This is like bringing up a whole new industry. Working with a company like TATA and TASL means they already have a lot of the processes understood which is a big benefit.”(F-16: What It Takes To Build This Fighter Plane In India)Only ITI and production facility based engineers, an production facility which being from the leading manufacturer will be atleast 50% if not less automated, raises questions:How many jobs for a automated facility like this? even if you say it will have the entire production facility and not just final assembly.What about R&D? as nothing mentioned about researchers, PHDWhy change of plans by LM about making India” the only manufacturer” to transferring only texas line to India and making india “one of the many manufacturer” needs to be addressed? Is this done to keep Pakistan safe or better word “to keep the Pakistani market safe.”Also there is no written RFI from governement about this deal only a informal letter. This raises concerns too.CONCLUSION: Let alone F-16 the deal itself has many flaws. When you add “Trump card” into “Make in India” things get little ugly. This deal is far from being materialized as there are several concerns that need to be answered. It doesn’t matter how the media publicize it in name of Pakistan or Game changer or something else.TRUTH IS AS OF NOW THE FUTURE OF TEJAS MORE SOLID THAN THE F-16 IN THIS COUNTRY BECAUSE IF THE TODAY’S REPORT IS TRUE THAN IT IS MORE LIKELY TEJAS MK2 WILL BE GETTING MORE ATTENTION FROM IAF AND GOVERNMENT .
-
What is jihad? What is its real meaning? What are the different types of jihad? Does an external and internal jihad exist?
Jihad is a fact of life. What is called ‘effort' or ‘struggle' in English is called ‘jihad' in Arabic. Jihad is not some mysterious thing. Nor is it synonymous with violence. It simply means making great efforts or striving for a particular purpose.The root word of jihad is juhd, which connotes making much effort for something. According to the famous Arabic dictionary Lisan al-Arab, the word juhd means utmost effort. Juhd and related words appear in different forms to indicate this meaning. For instance, the phrase jahada al-labn, which means, ‘Making efforts and taking out all the butter'. In Arabic, one says bazala juhdahu, that is, ‘He exerted his utmost power or ability'. Likewise, it is said, jahada ar-rajulu fi kaza ay jadda fihi wa balagha , which means, ‘The man made every effort and tried his best for the cause'. This is precisely what the terms jihad and mujahid (one who engages in jihad) mean.Striving hard for a particular purpose is something that all human beings do. It is a human characteristic. There are words in every language to denote such effort, and the word for this in Arabic is ‘jihad'. This is the basic meaning of the word ‘jihad'.There is one difference, though, that must be noted in this regard. The term ‘effort' or ‘struggle' ordinarily does not also connote Divine reward or worship. But when the term jihad is used in the Islamic context, these are implied. Thus, jihad refers to a particular sort of effort or struggle that is also a form of worship and that earns Divine reward for the person who engages in it. As the Quran says: Jahidu fillah haqqa jihadihi (22:78). It means: “Strive for the cause of God as it behoves you to strive for it.” (22:78)In some situations, the act of jihad or struggle might take the form of facing one's opponents. On such occasions, in terms of usage, and not in the literal sense, jihad can also take on the sense of war. Hence, Imam al-Raghib al-Isfahani, an eleventh century Muslim scholar of Quranic exegesis and the Arabic language, mentions three types of jihad:a. Fighting one's external enemies.b. Fighting Satan.c. Fighting one's own selfJihad in the QuranIn the Quran, the word ‘jihad' or its derivatives have been used in the same sense as it is used in the Arabic lexicon—that is, in the sense of engaging in great efforts for some purpose. The word ‘jihad' appears four times in the Quran, and every time it is used in the sense of effort and struggle, and not directly as a synonym for war.In this regard, the translation of the first relevant Quranic verse (9:24) is as follows:Say, “If your fathers and your sons and your brothers and your spouses and your tribe, and the worldly goods which you have acquired, and the commerce which you fear will decline, and the homes you love are dearer to you than God and His Messenger and the struggle for His cause, then wait until God fulfills His decree. God does not guide the disobedient people.”In this verse, followers of Islam are commanded to support the Prophet, at the level of sacrifice, in the in the Islamic mission of dawah, or inviting people to God. They must do this even if their personal interests are affected, if they suffer commercial loss, and if they are forced to undergo physical hardship. In every situation, they must be with the Prophet in this dawah mission. In this verse, the phrase ‘jihad in the path of God' has been used in reference to the Prophet's dawah mission, and not war.The word jihad appears in the Quran for the second time (25:52) in this way:…so do not yield to those who deny the truth, but strive with the utmost strenuousness by means of this [Quran, to convey its message to them].In this verse, the term jihad very clearly refers to the jihad of dawah, because there can be no other meaning of engaging in jihad through the Quran.The term jihad appears for the third time in the Quran in the following verse (60:1):If you have left your homes to strive for My cause and out of a desire to seek My goodwill [...]This verse was revealed a short time before the victory over Makkah.The Prophet's journey from Madinah to Makkah in 630 CE was not for war. It was actually a peaceful march, engaged in order to obtain the peaceful results that followed from the Hudaybiyyah peace treaty. The treaty was signed between the Prophet Muhammad and the Quraysh of Makkah in the year 628 CE. The Prophet, along with 1,400 companions, was journeying to Makkah from Madinah to perform the Umrah, or the minor pilgrimage. However, when they signNowed a place called Hudaybiyyah, ten miles from Makkah, the leaders of Quraysh stopped the Prophet from going forward. To resolve the deadlock, the Prophet entered into negotiations with the Quraysh and unilaterally accepted the conditions laid down by them. This resulted in a ten-year no-war pact, known as the Hudaybiyyah Treaty. Two years after the treaty, when the Prophet and his companions were peacefully marching towards Makkah, a Muslim remarked “This day is the day of war”, but the Prophet replied: “This day is the day of mercy.”In the fourth verse (22:78), the word jihad appears in this way:Strive for the cause of God as it behoves you to strive for it.In this verse, by jihad is meant the jihad of dawah, as is clear from the context in which it appears.What is Jihad?To better understand what jihad is, the first thing one must know is that whatever Muslims are doing today in the name of jihad is not jihad. These are all wars unleashed by communal sentiments, and have been wrongly named as jihads.Jihad actually means peaceful struggle. It is not synonymous with war. However, sometimes, the word jihad is used in an extended sense to refer to war. But in the literal sense, jihad and war, or what is called qital in Arabic, are not synonymous terms.Consider the following Quranic verses and hadith reports, or sayings about or attributed to the Prophet of Islam, to appreciate some usages of the term ‘jihad':1. The Quran (29:69) says:We will surely guide in Our ways those who strive hard for Our cause […]In this verse, the search for the truth has been called jihad—that is to say, making efforts to discover God, to attain God-realisation and to search for ways to develop closeness with God. Clearly, this jihad has no relation with war or confrontation.2. In the same way, the Quran (49:15) speaks of true believers as those who strive with their wealth for the cause of God. It says:The believers are only those who have faith in God and His Messenger and then doubt not, but strive, hard with their wealth and their persons for the cause of God. Such are the truthful ones.According to this verse, to spend one's wealth in God's path is an act of jihad.3. Likewise, the Quran (25:52) says:[…] so do not yield to those who deny the truth, but strive with the utmost strenuousness by means of this [Quran, to convey its message to them].In other words, this is an instruction to engage in peaceful struggle or efforts to spread the teachings of the Quran.4. Similarly, the Prophet is reported to have said: Al-mujahid man jahada nafsahu fi ta?atillah. It means that a mujahid is one who strives against himself for the sake of obeying God.From this we learn that to fight against the promptings of one's self and to persevere on the path of truth is a jihad. Obviously, this struggle takes place inside oneself, in the realm of one's psyche, and not on a battlefield in the external world.5. The Prophet is reported to have said: Al-hajj jihad. That is, “Haj is a jihad.” From this we learn that undertaking Haj pilgrimage is an act of jihad. In performing the Haj in the desirable way the haji or Haj pilgrim has to make great efforts.6. According to a tradition, the Prophet of Islam is reported to have said about serving one's parents: fafihima fajahid (Sahih al-Bukhari). It means, ‘Do jihad with regard to your parents.' From this we learn that serving one's parents is an act of jihad.The Concept of Jihad in IslamAs noted earlier, the word ‘jihad' is derived from the root juhd, which means ‘to strive' or ‘to struggle'. It denotes the exertion of oneself to the utmost, to the limits of one's capacity, in some activity or for some purpose. Thus, the Quran says, “And strive for the cause of God as it behoves you to strive for it.” (22:78)In the Arabic language, the word ‘jihad' actually denotes effort or all-out effort for something. Because fighting one's enemies is also one form of such effort or striving, it is also referred to as a jihad, in an extended sense. However, the actual Arabic word for this is qital, and not jihad.Fighting with one's enemies is something that might happen by chance, and only occasionally. However, jihad is a continuous process, and one that animates every day and night of the life of the true believer. It never ceases. This continuous jihad is the ceaseless efforts a believer makes at every moment to abide by, and remain established in, God's will in every aspect of his life. Such a person does not let any obstructions affect his life, such as the desires of the self, the allure of gain and personal aggrandisement, the power of culture and the pressure of tradition, the promptings of opportunism, the lust for wealth, and so on. All such things are obstacles in leading a God-oriented life and doing good deeds. Overcoming all such obstacles and abiding by the commandments of God is the real jihad, and this is what jihad's basic meaning is.There are many references to this jihad in the sayings attributed to the Prophet in the books of Hadith. For instance, in the Musnad of Imam Ahmad, there are several traditions, such as:1. Al-mujahid man jahada nafsahu lillahThat is, ‘A mujahid is one who struggles with his own self for the sake of God.' (6/20)2. Al-mujahid man jahada nafsahu fi sabilillahThat is, ‘A mujahid is he who exerts himself for the cause of God.' (6/22)3. Al-mujahid man jahada nafsahu fi ta?atillahThat is, ‘A mujahid is he who struggles with his own self in submission to the will of God.' (6/22)This present world is a testing ground. It has been fashioned in such a way that human beings are constantly faced challenging situations that are tests for them. In the course of these tests, people have to face various hurdles. So, for instance, you might face a situation where you are confronted with something, but you feel that acknowledging it might lower your status. You might have in your possession something that actually belongs to someone else and you feel that returning it to its rightful owner would damage your interests. Or, you think that leading a modest life is tantamount to suppressing your desires and ego. At times, you might think that if you do not give vent to feelings of anger and revenge, you would negate yourself. You might hesitate to uphold justice, for fear of losing your popularity. You might feel that if you act in a principled manner, instead of selfishly, you might lose certain facilities. And so on.In this way, on various occasions you have to repeatedly suppress or deny your desires. If you are willing to sacrifice your ego totally and surmount all hurdles and face all sorts of difficulties and losses but still remain firmly established on the Truth—this is the actual jihad, or the primary meaning of jihad. It is those who remain steadfast in this jihad who will be eligible for Paradise in the Hereafter.Jihad is essentially a sort of peaceful struggle. One form of this peaceful struggle is dawah, inviting people to God. As mentioned earlier, the Quran (25:52) says:[…] so do not yield to those who deny the truth, but strive with the utmost strenuousness by means of this [Quran, to convey its message to them].The jihad that this Quranic verse refers to is not about military action. Rather, it refers to an entirely intellectual and ideological task. In short, it means refuting falsehood and affirming the truth.In its primary sense, jihad in the form of qital or war, too, is another name for peaceful struggle. That is to say, if an enemy challenges one militarily, even then, one should initially strive, to the utmost extent possible, to respond to this challenge through peaceful means. Peaceful means can be abandoned only when it is no longer possible to use them, when war becomes the only possible option left to respond to war initiated by others.In this regard, a statement recorded in the Sahih al-Bukhari, and attributed to Aisha, wife of the Prophet, serves as a guiding principle. According to this report, whenever the Prophet was faced with two alternatives, he would always opt for the easier one. This means that whenever he had to choose between two options, he would always leave the harder option and choose the easier one.This practice, or sunnat, of the Prophet applies not only to the routine affairs of life but also to serious matters such as war, which by its very nature is a difficult option. A study of the life of the Prophet reveals that he never initiated war himself. Whenever his opponents sought to entangle him in fighting, he would always adopt some way to try to avoid it and stave off war. He engaged in war only when there was no other way left. Thus, going by the Prophet's method, wars of aggression are forbidden in Islam. Islam allows only for defensive war, and that, too, only when it becomes absolutely unavoidable.In life, one is always faced with the problem of having to choose between two options: peaceful means, on the one hand, and violent means, on the other. The accounts of the Prophet's life tell us that always, and in every matter, he shunned violence and adopted peaceful methods. His whole life was a successful model of this principle.Here are some instances that illustrate this point:1. Soon after being appointed as a prophet, the Prophet of Islam was faced with choosing between the above-mentioned two options—peaceful and violent methods. As a prophet, his mission was to end polytheism and establish tawhid, faith in and surrender to the one God. The Kaaba in Makkah had been established as a centre of tawhid, but at the time when the Prophet received his prophethood, 360 idols had been installed therein. Hence, one might think that the Prophet should first have been instructed in the Quran to purify the Kaaba of idols and remake it as a centre of tawhid, thus advancing his mission. But had this been the case and had he started his work in this way, it would have been tantamount to warring with the Quraysh of Makkah, who enjoyed leadership among the Arabs precisely because they had become the custodians of the Kaaba.History tells us that at this stage, the Prophet completely abstained from practically purifying the Kaaba of idols, and limited himself only to the ideological dawah of tawhid.This was, thus, an early example set by the Prophet of choosing a peaceful method over a violent one.2. Firmly abiding by this peaceful principle, the Prophet carried on his psignNowing work in Makkah for 13 years. Yet, despite this, the Quraysh turned into his fierce opponents, so much so that their leaders plotted to kill him. Accordingly, they armed themselves with swords and surrounded his house.This was, in effect, an open challenge to war issued to the Prophet and his companions. However, following God's guidance, the Prophet decided to avoid armed confrontation. And so, in the silence of the night, he left Makkah and secretly travelled to Madinah. This incident is known in Islamic history as the Hijrah.The Hijrah clearly exemplifies the choice of a peaceful method, as opposed to a violent one.3. The ‘Battle of the Trench', also known as the Battle of Ahzab, is another illustration of this sunnat of the Prophet. On this occasion, a vast number of the Prophet's opponents from different tribes assembled and marched towards Madinah in order to attack it. This was an open challenge to war on their part. However, in order to avoid war, the Prophet arranged for a trench to be dug around the town. This served as a buffer against the attackers. And so, the Quraysh army, having spent just a few days on the other side of the trench, turned back in retreat.Making this trench, too, was an example of the Prophet's choosing a peaceful option, as opposed to a violent one.4. The Treaty of Hudaybiyyah is also an example of this policy of the Prophet. The Prophet and his companions wanted to enter Makkah and perform the Umrah or minor pilgrimage, but they were stopped by the leaders of Makkah at a place called Hudaybiyyah and were told to go back to Madinah. The Quraysh said that they would not allow them to enter Makkah at any cost.This was, in other words, a challenge to war on the part of the Quraysh. Had the Prophet proceeded towards Makkah in accordance with his plan of performing the Umrah, it was certain that armed confrontation with the Quraysh would have broken out. However, he ended his journey at Hudaybiyyah. There, he entered into a peace treaty with the Quraysh by unilaterally accepting their conditions, and then he returned to Madinah.This is yet another clear example of the Prophet choosing a peaceful method over a violent one.5. This same sunnat or practice of the Prophet was also exemplified in the victory over Makkah. On this occasion, he was accompanied by 10,000 devoted companions. They could certainly have successfully fought the Quraysh. However, instead of using force, the Prophet chose to give a demonstration of force. He did not set out with this 10,000-strong army by making an announcement and then set about fighting the Quraysh and capturing Makkah. Instead, what he did was that he made preparations for the journey in complete secrecy and travelled along with his companions to Makkah and silently entered the town. His entry into Makkah was so sudden that the Quraysh were unable to make any preparations against him, and so Makkah was won over without any bloody confrontation.This, too, is an example of the Prophet's choice of a peaceful, over a violent, method.These examples prove that not only in ordinary conditions, but also in extreme emergency situations, the Prophet adopted the principle of peace, as opposed to war. All his successes are practical examples of this very sunnat of peace.As indicated above, in Islam peace is the general commandment, while war is only a rare exception, to be resorted to only when it becomes an absolutely unavoidable compulsion. Keep this principle in mind and survey the world today. You will find that the modern age is completely different from the world of ancient times in this regard. In the past, the use of violent methods was a common or general practice, while adopting peaceful methods was an extremely difficult thing to do. However, today the situation has completely changed. In today's world, violent methods have become completely undesirable and unacceptable. In contrast, peaceful methods are now the only acceptable option. Moreover, today, peaceful methods now enjoy very strong intellectual and practical supports, that have made them extremely powerful and effective.These supports for peaceful methods are very many—for instance, the right to express one's views, the possibilities of widely disseminating one's views using modern means of communications, employing the power of the media in one's favour, and so on. These modern transformations have made peaceful methods both much more popular, and, at the same time, much more effective, options.As mentioned earlier, the Prophet's sunnat or practice was that when peaceful methods are available in practice, these methods alone must be used for the Islamic movement, and violent struggle should be abandoned. In today's context, because of the vast transformations that have taken place, not only are peaceful methods now freely available, but also, on the basis of the supporting factors mentioned above, they have become much more effective. It can be safely said, without any fear of exaggeration, that today, violent methods have not only become difficult but that they are also completely useless in practical terms. In contrast, peaceful methods are far easier to adopt and also very effective.No longer is the use of peaceful methods a question of choosing between two possible options—peaceful versus violent. Rather, the peaceful method is now the only possible and effective option. And so, it is absolutely correct to say that violent methods must now be abandoned in practice. They should be, in the language of the Shariah, regarded as mansukh, or abrogated. The followers of Islam are now left, at the practical level, with only one method to adopt—and that, without any doubt whatsoever, is the peaceful method, unless such changes take place in prevailing conditions that once again change the rules that apply in this regard.It is true that in the past, violent methods were used on some occasions, but these were only a choice compelled by the conditions of the age in which the Prophet lived. But since, as a result of changes in the age, no longer does any such compulsion exist, the choice of violent methods must now be considered to be unnecessary and not in consonance with the Prophet's sunnat. In the changed conditions of today, only peaceful methods must be used.An instructive example from recent times in this regard is the life of Mahatma Gandhi. Because of the changes our times have witnessed that are referred to here, it was possible for Mahatma Gandhi to engage in a full-fledged political struggle and succeed. And all of this happened by adhering, from start to finish, to non-violent methods and peaceful activism.According to a well-known principle of fiqh or Muslim jurisprudence, certain rules can or should be modified to suit the change of time and place. This accepted principle of fiqh demands that when times have changed, one must, if need be, seek the re-application of relevant Shariah commandments in accordance with the prevailing conditions. This principle of fiqh applies as much to issues of war as it does to many other matters. It, too, demands that violent methods should now be abandoned and that peaceful methods alone be considered legitimate according to the Shariah.Contemporary Self-Styled Jihadi MovementsToday, in many countries across the world, Muslims are engaged in violent movements in the name of jihad. But the fact is that no movement can become a jihad simply because its flag-bearers give it that name. An action can be considered an Islamic jihad only if and when it completely fulfills the conditions that Islam has established for jihad. Without these conditions of jihad being fulfilled, a movement cannot be a jihad in actual fact. Rather, it is what is condemned in the Quran as fasad, or corruption and chaos. Those who are engaged in such activities will not gain the rewards meant for those who participate in jihad. Instead, they will deserve only punishment.I have discussed in considerable detail in several of my books the various conditions for jihad in the sense of qital or war. Here, I wish to clarify just one point. And that is that jihad in the sense of war does not have the same status as individual actions such as prayer and fasting. Instead, it is an action that has wholly to do with the state.This status of jihad in the sense of war is very clearly explained in the Quran and Hadith. For instance, the Quran (4:83) ordains that if an atmosphere of fear is created because of an enemy, people should not launch action against it on their own. Instead, they should turn to those who are in authority—that is, people who are in-charge of the government, so that the latter can properly understand the situation and take appropriate and necessary steps.This Quranic verse tells us that in the event of fear (a situation of war), it is not permissible for members of the general public to act on their own. The only thing they can do is to leave the matter with the rulers and assist the latter in the actions they may take.According to a hadith report in the Sahih al-Bukhari, the Prophet is said to have declared that the leader is a shield; war is undertaken under his leadership; and protection is procured through him. From this we learn that military defence must always be conducted under the ruler's leadership. The general Muslim public must obey their rulers in this regard. Lending them their support, they must help them in their efforts.This issue is one on which there is a consensus among the fuqaha or scholars of Muslim jurisprudence. Perhaps no noted scholar of Muslim jurisprudence has any objection to it. According to the unanimous consensus of the fuqaha, only an established government can declare war. Or, as it is said in Arabic, ar-raheelu lil-imam, that is to say, the declaration of war is the sole prerogative of the ruler. Non-governmental actors, including groups and individual members of the general public, do not have the right to make such a declaration.The fact of the matter is that war is something that requires great organisation. It is only an established state that can engage in such an organised action. This is why only states can engage in war. It is not at all legitimate for members of the public to initiate war.In present times, in numerous countries Muslims are engaged in violent confrontation. But almost without exception, these are not Islamic jihads, but, rather, what is called fasad, or anarchy. This is because none of these so-called jihads has been launched by an established government. All of them have been launched and are being carried out by what in today's parlance are called non-governmental organisations. If some of their so-called jihadi activities enjoy the support of some Muslim government, this support is being provided in a clandestine and undeclared manner. According to the Shariah, a Muslim government has the right to engage in jihad only if it openly and explicitly announces this. According to Islam, it is unlawful for a Muslim government to engage in war without an open declaration of it.The violent activities presently engaged in by Muslims in the name of jihad in various parts of the world are of two types: guerilla war and proxy war. Both of these are, without any doubt, wholly illegitimate in Islam. Guerilla war is illegitimate in Islam because it is conducted by non-governmental actors, and not an established government. And proxy war is illegitimate because it is engaged in by a government without making an open declaration of hostilities, which is not legitimate in Islam.Three Types of JihadIslamic jihad, properly understood, is a constructive and continuous action or process. It continues uninterrupted throughout the life of a true believer. It has three aspects:1. Jihad-e Nafs: This is the struggle against one's negative feelings and improper desires and persevering to remain steadfast on the path that is pleasing to God.2. Jihad-e Dawah: This is the struggle to convey the message of God to all of humankind and to make utmost effort for this cause with feelings of compassion and well-wishing for all. This is an exalted task, and so it is called jihad-e kabir or ‘great jihad' in the Quran (25:52).3. Jihad in the face of enmity: In the past, this jihad was actually a peaceful one, and so it remains now as well.In this sense, then, jihad is a peaceful struggle, and not a violent one.There are numerous similar Quranic verses and hadith reports that clearly tell us that the act of jihad is basically a peaceful action. It is a form of struggle for a Divine task that is conducted within peaceful limits. The correct translation of jihad, then, would be ‘peaceful struggle'.The Importance of PeaceThe Quran (4:128) says:[…] reconciliation is best.What is reconciliation? It is but another name for the results of peace. Where there is reconciliation, there is peace. Where there is no reconciliation, there is no peace. In this sense, then, it can be said that in Islam peace is the summum bonum, or the greatest good.Generally, people think that justice is very important. But in fact justice is just a concept or notion. The real question is how this concept should be made a reality. There is only one way for this—and that is through peace. If peace is established, numerous opportunities can be opened up, which, when availed of, can lead to justice. An individual or group can secure justice only when it recognises available opportunities and wisely avails of them.Across the world today, there are people who are engaged in violent conflicts in order to secure justice. Yet, all of them have failed to get the justice that they seek. There is only one reason for this—and that is because their methods are wrong. In this world, the question of the method you use to get what you want is of utmost importance. Even if your goal or purpose is good, you cannot achieve it if the means you adopt are wrong. This is a universal rule, and no individual or group is an exception as far as this is concerned.A group or community that seeks justice must first establish peace among its own members. Peace is so important that it must be established at any cost. It can never be established on a bilateral basis. Rather, it is always on the basis of unilateral patience. There is simply no other way to establish peace.The scheme of nature is based on opportunities. Nature provides us with plenty of opportunities. An atmosphere of hate and violence closes off these opportunities. Hate and violence act as trapdoors. To avail of the many opportunities that nature provides us, one needs to first put an end to hate and violence, to seal these trapdoors. And when this happens, one is deluged with a flood of all sorts of opportunities that one can avail of in order to achieve one's goals.These opportunities can help you in both the secular and the religious spheres. They can enable you to engage in efforts to advance educationally and economically. You can also avail of these opportunities for religious purposes—to invite people to God. Engaging in this work of dawah, you can become eligible for Divine reward.The ‘Beautification' of ViolenceViolence is in every sense a destructive action. The whole of human history is a testimony to the fact that no individual or group has ever secured any positive success through violence. Whenever an individual or group has taken to violence, it has only met with destruction, and not with any real benefit or progress. Yet, despite this, why is it that some people routinely resort to violence? This is because of what is called ‘Satanic beautification'. The Quran (15:39) tells us that Satan has a special method—of portraying a wrong action in seemingly beautiful words. Satan gives strife the name of ‘reform'. In this way, he influences peoples' minds. He entangles them in the false belief that whatever they are doing is not violence, but, rather, a holy jihad. It is the path to martyrdom that will take them straight to heaven, he tells them.Falling prey in this way to Satanic ‘beautification', people take to violence. They engage in wrong actions, and Satan deludes them into believing that what they are doing is good.There is only one way to save oneself from this Satanic ‘beautification'—and that is, to judge one's actions in terms of their results. One should realise that violent actions that lead to destruction and that destroy available opportunities are a result of Satan's ‘beautification'. One must, therefore, implore God for His forgiveness and abandon this path.Violence in itself is completely undesirable. It can never bring about any reform. It only works to inflict more damage. It always emerges from hate and enmity. One must cleanse one's mind of hate and enmity, and then Satan will not be able to exercise control over you.No Reaction in IslamIf you ask people who are engaged in violence, whether as individuals or as members of groups, why they are involved in destructive activities, they will answer that their violence is a ‘natural reaction'. If an individual or group is oppressed or denied justice, they will say, there is bound to be a reaction. And in so reacting, they will explain, they might even go to the extent of taking to arms and even suicide-bombing. If their violence is to end, they will tell you, the oppression by, and injustice of, the other party must first cease. Otherwise, they will contend, their violence will continue. If this reaction of theirs is to stop, they will say, the action of the other party must stop first. There is no use, they will argue, psignNowing only to them to give up violence.This philosophy of reaction is completely unnatural. The fundamental error people who argue like this make is that they have adopted a wrong yardstick for their actions. The proper yardstick to evaluate an action is to evaluate the results that emerge from it. A proper or appropriate action is one is that produces beneficial results for the one who engages in it. If it does not produce such results, it must definitely be given up.Actions can either produce beneficial results or prove to be counter-productive for those who engage in them. There is no third alternative. The best form of action is one that produces positive results. An action that does not produce such results only further magnifies your problem. And magnifying one's problem is not something that a wise person would want to do.To emotionally react to something, including someone else's actions, is, then, not the proper response to it. The proper response is to take stock of the prevailing situation, and, guided by a positive mindset, to plan one's course of action in a manner geared to producing positive results. Instead of reacting through confrontation and violence, one should respond in a constructive manner. This is the proper Islamic approach and method.The Lesser and the Greater JihadAccording to a hadith, when the Prophet and his companions returned to Madinah from a battle, the Prophet said: raja?na min al-jihad il-asghar ila al-jihad il-akbar. (Kanz al-Ummal) That is, “We have returned from a lesser jihad towards a greater jihad.” In other words, it was an announcement that the believers had come back from temporary jihad to permanent jihad. By temporary jihad is meant defensive jihad, whose necessity might arise only occasionally. By permanent jihad is meant spiritual jihad, which continues non-stop in every person's life.This point is narrated in another hadith report in this way: jahidu ahwa?akum kama tujahiduna a?da?akum. That is, “Do jihad with your desires as you do jihad with your opponents.”In Islam, fighting against one's enemy is an extremely temporary act, whose need arises when someone has attacked a Muslim state. This is a defensive jihad, and only some trained people participate in it, not the entire Muslim community. In contrast to this, jihad against one's nafs or self is something that pertains to an individual, and goes on throughout the life of a true believer.For instance, it is an act of merit that when a Muslim meets someone, he greets him with the phrase Assalamu Alaikum, which means ‘peace be upon you.' These words are so lofty that according to a hadith, one who greets another this way is given the good tidings of Paradise. But in this world, where we live along with many other people, we are repeatedly face bitter experiences. On account of this, every person develops complaints against, and negative feelings for, others, which he nurses in his heart. In such a situation, only a person who has already purified his heart of all negative emotions and is genuinely concerned for the well-being of others can genuinely wish Assalamu Alaikum to someone else. This task is very difficult. It requires the enormous efforts that are termed as ‘jihad'.There is a tradition, recorded in the Sahih Muslim, according to which the Prophet said: Alhamdulillah tamla ul-mizan. This means, “The word Alhamdulillah (‘Thanks be to God') fills up the scale.”On the Day of Judgment, one's good deeds and bad deeds will be weighed on the scale set up by God. According to the above-mentioned tradition, the scale will be filled up for a person who says the word Alhamdulillah. That is, his good deeds will outweigh his bad deeds.This is no simple matter. To genuinely say Alhamdulillah requires a great intellectual effort. To say Alhamdulillah is to express gratitude for God's blessings. Man receives these blessings in various forms all the time. Every person receives them without any effort on his part. People generally become habituated to them, because of which they do not consciously recognise them as blessings.In such a situation, to genuinely say Alhamdulillah requires one to engage in an intellectual jihad. One has to bring into action one's powers of thinking and bring what is in the subconscious into the conscious mind. One needs to give a new direction to one's feelings. One needs to struggle as a mujahid, or one who engages in jihad, to awaken one's intellectual powers. Only after this can he utter such words as can fill up the scale on the Day of Judgment.Human beings have various kinds of desires and mental states, such as greed, superiority complex, scorn, impatience, anger, revenge, and so on. Often, people remain dominated by these negative states. In addition to this, they get deeply attached to certain things—for example, wealth, fame, their children, and so on.People oscillate between negative and positive emotions, hate and love. Their thinking is shaped by these emotions. Consciously or otherwise, they mould their lives according to these emotions. Given this, it is undoubtedly an act of jihad for someone to continuously make God the focus of his or her attention and to not deviate from the straight path. This is the immensely difficult task that is called in the Hadith as jihad-e nafs, or jihad against one's self.SummaryThe Arabic word ‘jihad' means precisely what is called ‘peaceful struggle' in English. And what is meant by this peaceful struggle is basically the dawah effort, as the Quran (25:52) says:[…] so do not yield to those who deny the truth, but strive with the utmost strenuousness by means of this [Quran, to convey its message to them].This verse refers to communicating the message of the Quran to people through peaceful efforts.Dawah is essentially an ideological struggle. It is a very wide-ranging effort. It has various demands. When efforts are made to engage in dawah together with all its necessary demands, it becomes a major struggle. This is why dawah work is called ‘jihad'.Jihad means precisely this. However, sometimes the word ‘jihad' is also used in an extended sense to denote war. But this is only an extended meaning. The commandments and etiquette of jihad and war are totally different. The actual aim of the jihad of dawah is to transform the other party's thinking, whereas, in contrast, war aims at the extermination of the other party.A basic difference between jihad and war is that jihad in the sense of dawah is a general commandment. The dawah jihad has to be engaged in at all times and under all circumstances. The objective of the jihad of dawah is to convey the message of God to all people. Dawah is a constructive action, based on wishing well for others, and this must carry on at all times, in every generation. In contrast to this, jihad in the sense of war is a temporary action, engaged in only when another country militarily attacks a Muslim country. The responsibility for countering this attack does not lie with individuals. Rather, it is the sole responsibility of an established state that makes necessary arrangements for this purpose.Most Islamic acts are governed by conditions. Jihad in the sense of war is also subject to certain conditions. Present-day Muslim movements that are fighting in the name of jihad do not fulfill these conditions. Merely labeling one's actions as jihad does not mean that they qualify as jihad. In this matter, it is important to refer to Islamic teachings about jihad, rather than form an opinion through the actions of certain Muslims. Muslims should be judged in the light of Islamic teachings, and not vice versa.
-
Who was the greater warrior in Mahabharat, Karna or Bhishma Pitamah?
Karna’s achievements were better than Bhishma and Drona. Please refer Karna Parva book. Also, even when Arjuna didn’t attack Bhishma furiously, Bhishma could not cause much damage do Pandavas. Bhisma had no clue to counter Arjuna’s Aindra weapon. Karna clearly countered Aindra and other astras of Arjuna.1) Section 90 of Karna Parva:"Then Karna, with a number of whetted shafts endued with great energy, cut off the string of Arjuna's bow. Similarly he cut off the second string, and then the third, and then the fourth, and then the fifth. The sixth also was cut off by Vrisha, and then the seventh, then the eighth, then the ninth, then the tenth, and then at last the eleventh."KARNA CUTTING OFF ARJUNA'S GANDIVA STRINGS 11 TIMES CONSECUTIVELY. This was a feat which none had achieved. Neither Bhishma nor Drona.2) Section 146 of Drona Parva, Krishna says "For the present, O Partha, it is not proper for thee to fight with Karna.The latter hath with him the blazing dart, like a fierce meteor, that Vasava gave him. O slayer of hostile heroes,he hath kept it for thy sake, worshipping it with reverence." (Fine, that was a normal situation, Krishna stopped Arjuna to fight, that's fine)But again, in Section 173 of Drona Parva,Krishna says "I do not, however, O sinless one,regard the time to have come, O mighty-armed one,for thee to encounter the Suta's son in battle. The blazing dart, resembling a mighty meteor, given himby Vasava, is still with him, O thou of mighty arms, kept for thee with care,by the Suta's son. He keepeth that dart by him, and hath now assumed a terribleform."(This was unacceptable since Karna was smashing away everyone and Yudhishthira was panicking)3) Section 182 of Drona Parva,When Dhritarashtra (enquiring Sanjaya) and Satyaki (enquiring Krishna) regarding - Despite every night Karna and Kauravas discussed the usage of Indra’s dart (which Karna had for the sole purpose of killing Arjuna), why he did not use it against Arjuna during the brief encounters they faced in the 6 days, for which Krishna says“'Karna having assented to this, saying 'So be it' (the desire of) slaughtering the wielder of Gandiva, O bull amongst the Sinis, was ever present in Karna's heart. “””I, however, O foremost of warriors, always used to stupefy the son of Radha”””. It was for this that he did not hurl the dart at Pandu's son, owning white steeds.”Thus, Krishna not only prevented Arjuna from facing Karna, Krishna created illusions on all the 6 days on everyone of Kuru army (especially Karna) to forget the usage of Indra’s dart. (Despite every night Karna and others debated to use it on Arjuna, they still forgot due to Krishna.4) Section 180 of Drona Parva,Krishna says “When his car-wheels will sink in the earth, availing thyself of that opportunity, thou shouldst slay him in that distressful situation. I will make thee a sign beforehand. Warned by it, thou shouldst act. The vanquisher of Vala himself, that foremost of heroes, wielding his thunder, is incapable of slaying the invincible Karna while the latter stands weapon in hand.”Krishna knew that Arjuna could never defeat Karna in a fair fight in the Kurukshetra War and had already given the hint to Arjuna that that was the only way Arjuna could ever defeat Karna as per the above point.5) Section 124 of Bhishma Parva,Bhishma said this when Karna met him with tears, “I know thy prowess in battle, which can with difficulty be borne on earth by foes! I know also thy regard for Brahmanas. thy courage, and thy great attachment to alms-giving! O thou that resemblest a very god, amongst men thereis none like thee! For fear of intestine dissensions I always spoke harsh words about thee. In bowmanship, in aiming weapon, in lightness of hand and in strength of weapons, thou art equal to Phalguni (Arjuna) himself, or the high-souled Krishna! O Karna, proceeding to the city of Kasi, alone with thy bow, thou hadst crushed the kings in battle for procuring a bride for the Kuru king! The mighty and invincible king Jarasandha also, ever boastful of his prowess inbattle, could not become thy match in fight! Thou art devoted to Brahmanas; thou always fightest fairly! In energy and strength, thou art equal to a child of the celestials and certainly much superior to men. The wrath I cherished against thee is gone.”A proof that Karna helped Duryodhana in marrying Banumathi by fighting with other kings which included Jarasandha too and Karna defeated everyone - for Duryodhana.6) Section 252 and Section 253 of book 3,Again, for Duryodhana, Karna conquered the entire India, conducted Vaishnava sacrifice and made Duryodhana the emperor!7) 5th and 6th points clearly establish that Karna cared for Duryodhana and it was not just about killing Arjuna. We never went to their palace and witnessed how they cared for each other. It is ridiculous to say that both maintained their friendship forindividual aspiration or mutual ambition or something. As per Section 92 of Karna Parva, Duryodhana wept badly, lost senses when Karna died. (There are also a lot of instances in Karna Parva when Karna gave priority for Duryodhana rather than his personal fight / rivalries with the enemies)8) Section 180 of Drona Parva, Krishna says“Devoted to Brahmanas, truthful in speech, engaged in penances, observant of vows, kind even unto foes, for these reasons Karna is called Vrisha.”9) Section 49 of Karna Parva,“Then Salya addressed him, and said, “Do not, O Karna, seize this best of kings. As soon as thou seizes him, he will reduce both thee and me to ashes.”The reason why Karna did not seize Yudhishtira.(In the same parva, before this section, you can find that Duryodhana wanted either Yudhisthira seized or Arjuna slain (Section 36 of Karna Parva). I am not able to find in which Parva I read that Yudhisthira should not be killed since if that happened, Arjuna would destroy everyone in anger – told by Duryodhana.)10) Section 66 of Karna Parva,Yudhisthira told that he never had a wink of sleep for 13 years due to fear of Karna.I don’t have patience to search in which parva it is mentioned that Yudhisthira feared Karna more than Bhishma and Drona. But section 66 of Karna Parva proves it.11) Section 3 of Santi Parva,"Unto the cheerless and trembling Karna, prostrated with joined hands upon earth, that foremost one of Bhrigu's race,smiling though filled with wrath, answered, 'Since thou hast, from avarice of weapons, behaved here with falsehood, therefore, O wretch, this Brahma weapon shalt not dwell in thy remembrance 1. Since thou art not a Brahmana, truly this Brahma weapon shall not, up to the time of thy death, dwell in thee when thous halt be engaged with a warrior equal to thyself! 2 Go hence, this is no place for a person of such false behaviour as thou! On earth, no Kshatriya will bethy equal in battle.' Thus addressed by Rama, Karna came away, having duty taken his leave."Thus, from the above, you can observe that Parashuram told Karna in a gentle way that his Brahmastra alone would be forgotten when he faced a "warrior equal to his prowess" and also said "On earth,no Kshatriya will be thy equal in battle". Despite cursing, he counterpraised Karna.12) Section 90 of Karna Parva,“when the hour of Karna’s death came, the high Brahma weapon that the illustrious Bhargava had imparted unto him, escaped from his memory”In the same section 90, if you read further, you canfind the statement as below“Trembling at the shock, Karna then displayed his activity to the utmost of his power. Steadying himself by a powerful effort he invoked the Brahma weapon”Thus, Karna used Brahmastra despite forgetting. Becauseof Parashuram’s counter praising that no Kshatriya would be Karna’s equal.PS: He used it thrice against Arjuna (Section 89, Section 90 after forgetting for a moment, and again in Section 91) Thus, Karna made the praise of his Guru truthful by invoking Brahmastra 3 times and proved his Guru’s fact that that Karna was a better warrior than Arjuna, if they were by any means equal, Karna could have never used Brahmastra even once!13) Section 46 of Drona Parva,"The preceptor then, slowly and with a smile,said unto Karna, 'Abhimanyu is young, his prowess is great. His coat of mail is impenetrable. This one's father had been taught by me the method of wearing defensive armour. This subjugator of hostile towns assuredly knoweth the entires cience (of wearing armour)'."A fact that Abhimanyu wore defensive armour.Again, below is a proof on Section 38 of DronaParva,“Though afflicted in battle by Radha's son withshowers of weapons, still Subhadra's son who resembled a very celestial (forprowess) felt no pain.”My point is, degree of hardness varies, property and behavior of armour varies when comparison is made for normal armour and defensive impenetrable armour. For your info, when someone pierced an opponent with fierce shafts, the armour would fall down or get shattered into pieces byunable to withstand the impact of arrows. (As what happened when Karna shattered Yudhisthira’s armour to powder / pieces and as how Arjuna shattered Karna’s armour into powder / pieces and finally, the dress or skin would be exposed when the armour fell down. But that was not the case with Abhimanyu. He felt no pain and was able to fight without any problem.As per Section 180 of Drona Parva, Karna’s natural born armour was literally impiercable. Not even Sudharshana chakra or any astra could harm Karna if he possessed his natural armour forever.Degree of hardness of armours:Karna’s natural born (Not even piercable) > Abhimanyu’s defensive armour (Can be pierced but cannot be shattered into small pieces and cannot make the armour fall down from the body. Also there won’t be any pain despite getting pierced) > Normal armours (Can be shattered into minute pieces)I am not sure of the hardness of Duryodhana’s impenetrable armour which he wore at the end. I guess it is stronger than Abhimanyu’s but weaker than Karna’s natural armour.14) Karna used Pasupata astra. Proof – Section 60 of Karna ParvaKrishna says “Yonder Karna urges forward the mighty car-warriors of the Dhartarashtras towards the son of Pritha with the weaponscalled Sthunakarna, Indrasjaha and Pasupata, and with clubs and other weapons.”15) Section 56 of Karna parva -“Indeed, neither Bhishma, nor Drona, nor any other warrior of thy army had ever achieved such feats as were then achieved by Karna in that battle.”16) Around section 36 to section 46, Salya would constantly scold Karna and constantly praise Arjuna. Karna couldn’t bear the scolding and thought of even getting down the chariot. Salya scolded Karna as per the plan of Yudhisthira. (Udyoga Parva - Section 18 - Yudhisthira, advised Salya to scold badly. And in Karna Parva, it’s clearyly mentioned that Salya would even get permission in the beginning itself that he could say whatever he want but Karna should not mind it). Seriously - 10 sections of scoldings on Karna?? (Kudutha kaasuku melayae pesitaan Salya!)17) Section 87 of Karna Parva -Imagine Krishna’s and Arjuna’s reaction - when they finally see Salya and Karna on the opposite, Salya says “If, O Karna, the white steeded Arjuna slays thee in battle to-day, I myself, on a single car, will slay both Madhava and Phalguna.” Just imagine the reaction of them - actually Yudhisthira sent Salya to scold Karna, the reverse happened. (Salya was transformed slowly by Karna’s lightness of hands, in releasing huge number of arrows per second,etc. when you read the Parva, you would know how slowly Salya stopped scolding after initially scolding Karna for some 10 sections of the Parva and became a fan of Karna at the end)18) In Section 90, Again Krishna helped Arjuna by lowering the chariot when Karna used the infallible and irresistible Nagastra (The weapon he greased, oiled, worshipped and maintained for many years for killing Arjuna) and a snake would enter after Karna takes that weapon. Whether the snake entered or not entered, the Nagastra which he clearly protected for many years for killing Arjuna, would have surely killed Arjuna. (Refer Karna Parva) (Because Nagastra is infallible and irresistable)19) Bhishma and Drona were convinced that they could never defeat Arjuna and co. At least Bhishma tried faintly but Drona did not even try to defeat Arjuna and co. Arjuna used Indra astra on in the presence of Bhishma and made a blood river to flow in Kurukshetra with a heavy slaughter. Bhishma could not or did not counter and just looked angry at Arjuna. Seriously?!!! Drona - on the other hand, tried to send away Arjuna so that without Arjuna, he could seize Yudhisthira. (Finally he couldn’t seize Yudhisthira despite Arjuna went away for 2 days) (Read Bhishma Parva and Drona Parva by pressing “CTRL+F” of Arjuna. And during the encounters with Arjuna, they both never had any advantage or upper hand over Arjuna.20) The duty of a captain is to bring the team together and not create a rift in the team. Bhishma rated Karna as half a rathi when he was actually a Maharathi warrior (That too equal to 2 Maharathi warriors). Drona sided with Bhishma and rated Karna as half a rathi! I mean, being a captain and vice captain, why did they wanna destabilize a person’s manhood / bravery by degrading the person with false lies / false certificate? Is this right? So, Karna told that he would not fight as long as Bhishma fought! Bhishma gladly accepted it. (Finally, Karna outshined both Bhishma and Drona with a very huge fashion as per my above and below points - that too he fought for just 7 days against Bhishma of 10 days and Drona of 16 days) I judge a person’s character by his actions and not speech. This is a lack of maturity by both Bhishma and Drona and an unacceptable behaviour.21) Again, Bhishma’s and Drona’s failure to accomplish their oaths - As I said, I judge a person’s character by his actions and not words. If they could able to take an oath and stand by it, why couldn’t they give their best or at least try to their best? I agree Arjuna was better than them both but did they even had any shot at killing the 5 Pandavas. Thus, their character and attitude - I again rate below Karna.22) Karna fought with Rakshasa Ghatodgaja at dead night, I mean, none could have ever achieved that feat - super human achievement it was. Alone, single handed, without the help of Drona or Kripa or Ashwattama, he repeatedly defeated Ghatodgaja. Every time that Rakshasa was defeated, every time the Rakshasa used severe illusions and tricks along with more and more prowess. Entire men were astonished, Pandavas and allies watched the show with astonishment without blinking their eyes whereas Kauravas were literally terrified with fear and crying “Everything is gone, everything is gone”. Karna never displayed even slightest of fear. He killed the Rakshasa after repeatedly defeating it.23) Karna had a real shot or upper hand at killing Arjuna unlike Bhishma and Drona. Karna clearly countered Arjuna’s Indra astra by using Bhargavastra! Did Bhishma? Nope. Heavy slaughter happened to Kauravas due to Arjuna’s Indra astra and it caused a blood river flow in the presence of Bhishma. Karna routed the Pandavas, Panchalas along with all allies by entering into the middle and attacked them with all Celestial Divya astras! Broke the armour of Yudhisthira. He used Brahma astra, Bhargavastra, Pasupata astra and diverse celestial astras so that he could finally have an encounter with Arjuna. And he invoked Brahmastra 3 times against Arjuna by proving that no Kshatriya could ever be Karna’s equal by breaking Parashuram’s curse. Apart from Brahma astra, he also used Vayavya, Varuna astra (to counter Arjuna’s Agneyastra and as a result of excess Varuna astra - his wheel sank in the slushy earth) and used diverse celestial weapons wisely not only against Arjuna but also against entire enemies when he became the captain and shouldered up the responsibility.24) Karna broke 11 strings of Arjuna’s Gandiva - Did Bhishma and Drona break a single string?25) Karna had a real shot at killing all the 4 Pandavas but let them go away as per the promise to Kunti. Did Bhishma and Drona have any chance to kill 4 Pandavas or did they even create any chance to kill them? When Karna had a real chance at all the 4 Pandavas, did Bhishma and Drona have any chance at killing even a single Pandava?26) (Section 91 of Karna Parva) Even when Karna’s wheel sunk badly and his car tilted badly, Karna had a real shot at killing Arjuna when he made Arjuna lose his Gandiva from his hand’s grasp for the first time ever (An unimaginable feat). Arjuna trembled like a mountain in an earthquake, Gandiva fell down but Karna did not kill Arjuna. He took the time gap to retrieve the sunken wheel. Did Bhishma and Drona accomplish any of the above points?27) But why I like Karna is, unlike Bhishma and Drona, he fought by keeping his words. He assured Duryodhana that he would kill Arjuna and he fought for it and had a real chance when he made Arjuna lose his grasp on Gandiva by making it fall. Also he possessed Indra’s dart and the infallible Nagastra (Krishna lowered the chariot and saved Arjuna from certain death). He promised Kunti that he would not kill the other 4 Pandavas and he kept his words by letting them go (Refer Karna Parva) He didn't kill those 4 Pandavas though he had the chances, due to his promise to Kunti.28) My personal opinion is, I rate everyone as good, but extremely exceptional and best - I rate Karna and Arjuna. Not even Bhishma or Drona. They both never had any upper hand against Arjuna. Also, though their wisdom was high, they lacked street smart attitude. (Please don’t say they were compassionate and affectionate with Arjuna, that’s why they could not defeat Arjuna, that’s an utter false statement if someone says. It was actually Arjuna who felt affectionate and could not attack Bhishma and Drona. Even then they both could never have any upper hand over Arjuna. And they themselves repeatedly agreed that they could never have any upper hand over Arjuna.)29) Finally, regarding other points,A) I beg to differ regarding Karna calling Draupadi a whore. Karna laughed and teased / scolded Draupadi and Pandavas in Sabha Parva, I clearly read that Parva by using “ctrl+f” Karna. No where Karna called Draupadi a whore. He was left to shame in public in Draupadi’s Swayamwara when Draupadi told him she would not marry a Suta when Karna was exactly aiming for the fish target. (A feat which only Arjuna had accomplished in lifting and stringing that bow when every other king failed).She also teased Duryodhana that he was also a blind just like his father, which I don’t think she should have told such that others could hear. Thinking in mind is fine (not sure) but teasing an emperor along with the son (Karna’s best friend) and that to be heard by others, that’s definitely wrong. I am not defending Karna but I feel that any normal human being would have a grudge against Draupadi if he had been in Karna’s position in the above two circumstances. Thus he laughed at both Pandavas and Draupadi and gave insults but never he called her a whore!!! I clearly read the entire parva. Then what about Arjuna deciding to kill Yudhisthira in anger in section 69 of Karna Parva. It’s all human emotions. I don’t defend Karna’s actions as well as Arjuna’s behaviour to kill Yudhisthira. But these don’t determine the character of a person. Does it mean Arjuna is bad? Nope. These are clear emotions which get released in the form of words or behaviour.B) Regarding Karna donated everything so that he could get punya to defeat Arjuna, that’s a big joke. Again I used ctrl+f in Ashwamedha parva. Never he told such. Prove me by saying the section number.C) In Draupadi’s Swayamvara, the fight between Karna and Arjuna were close and equal. None had any upper hand. PS: I read it. Karna would be shocked when he heard the Brahmana (Arjuna) saying that he knew Brahma astra (Since Karna did not know that at that time). But the fight between them and their verdict - they were both equal.30) Epilogue:Regarding Mahabharatha itself, what we actually have is Vaisampayana's and not Jaimini's. They both were disciples of sage Vyasa and as per their profile and resume / Curriculum vitae, I prefer Jaimini over Vaisampayana. Jaimini's Mahabharatha was not supportive of Pandavas and not supportive of Kauravas. His writing was neutral. Sadly, his Mahabharatha was lost and only bits and pieces are available and considerable portion of Ashwamedha Parva. In Jaimini's Ashwamedha Parva, during Arjuna's conquests, even Arjuna could not defeat a demon. Bhima too. But that demon was defeated by Vrishaketu (Karna's son - whom Arjuna brought up affectionately as his own son). When that demon enquired his identity, Vrishaketu replied that he was the grandson of Surya and son of Karna. He was one of the last human beings to have known the knowledge of celestial weapons.My point is, under the name of Vaisampayana, lot of interpolations and manipulations have occurred in many ancient years by many writers / sages, which is clearly acknowledged by many researchers. Karna had two sons as per Jaimini, but in Vaisampayana's Mahabharatha, it was like 7 to 8 sons. Seriously, how can I accept this. And Vaisampayana never mentioned in Ashwamedha Parva that the demon which even Arjuna could not defeat, it was defeated by Karna's son. Also, Karna’s wife committed Sati after his death. Alas, not even told in our Vaisampayana Mahabharat. Also it was not mentioned who performed his last rites. Vaisampayana was a good writer and also the other sages / writers who interpolated the Mahabharat by using Vaisampayana’s name but I feel Jaimini’s neutral epic with equal weightage to everyone in Mahabharat would have been the best to be read.I am not a hater of Pandavas; I even like the way Vaisampayana has written Vyasa’s Mahabharat with respect to Dharma, philosophy, ancient Gods, sequences, etc. BUT, what i can’t accept is the weightage he’s shown towards Pandavas dharamas and less number of pages for Kauravas and Karna - I can’t accept that. Let any author write it neutrally with equal weightage and as a reader, let me decide what is good and what is bad and let me choose whom I like and whom I don’t like. And you were telling some times that Sanjaya said this, that, and Sanjaya might have been biased, etc. but remember that it’s Vaisampayana the Kingmaker of this epic and not Sanjaya! No one else. (If Vaisampayana can introduce 6 new sons of Karna in the war suddenly out of thin air, then anything is possible) (Contrary to Jaimini’s 2 sons of Karna). Thus, I feel little suspicious towards Pandavas and little sympathy and admiration towards Duryodhana and co. That’s it. In those days, for a king to accept a low caste as a friend and giving a kingdom instantly (Anga to Karna), that was an unimaginable feat! (I don’t care about selfish moto or whatever, none during those times would have that kind of broad mindedness, that’s my point). That temple in Kerala - you listen to the village tribe story in that temple village. They worship Duryodhana because, in that area during those times, those tribes were not supposed to give food or water to high class Kshatriyas, but Duryodhana got water from them and they were shocked to find out that Duryodhana was actually the emperor and asked for forgiveness. But Duryodhana smiled and told them that any human who brings water to a thirst man and he would not differentiate or degrade someone with caste at that moment and then he prayed to Gods that that particular tribe should not face any evil problems. The location where he prayed - they built temple for him! (Other minor deities are his wife Bhanumathi and few others). I don’t try to make ends meet or balance something or justify something. My point is, lot of emphasis on Pandavas’ dharma was there but not much weightage to anyone in Kauravas including Karna. Simple. And again I say, Thus, I feel littleeee suspicious towards Pandavas (Including Vaisampayana and other interpolators and manipulators of this epic under the same name called Vaisampayana) and little sympathy and admiration towards Duryodhana, Karna and co. That’s it.(Though I'm already convinced by our Vaisampayana's writing itself that Karna was the greatest, imagine how much happy I would be if I read a copy of Jaimini which was a neutral epic and not entirely supportive of Pandavas)
-
Why do we need F-16 planes when we have LCA Tejas?
Military aircrafts play a key role during a conflict. All the countries around the world try to build a better aircraft combinations. Aircraft combinations help in chocking out better combat strategy. Therefore major superpowers have at least 2 aircraft manufacturing aircrafts. The idea behind this is to have a better production line-up of aircrafts.Consider United States, it have both Boeing and Lockheed Martin along with other aircraft manufacturing companies to make fighter jets. So does Russia has Sukhoi aerospace and Mikoyan Aerospace. Thus a pair of aircrafts with different specifications can be used during conflictLet me explain you with an example, after world war 2 Vietnam war is one of the war that has witnessed a major aircraft resulting in many dogfights. United States Navy at that period had two formidable fighters such as Vought F8 crusader and McDonnell Douglas F4 phantom. Though the war was a loss for U.S.A but these 2 aircrafts have proved their mettle purely through this combinations against the Vietnamese MiGs.F8 CrusaderF4 phantomSimilarly Indian Air-force needs a variety of aircrafts in all category whether it be ground attack, dogfight, bomber etc. But India has always need to depend on Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) for making aircraft, it seriously needs a private aircraft manufacturing environment to have a similar situation like that of U.S and Russia. The effort of “Make In India” has proved its worthiness by the establishment of TASL, Mahindra aerospace, Reliance Aerospace etc., but these companies have very little knowledge on designing and manufacturing a fighter jet on its own, the same scenario which HAL had under earlier 70s and 80s. Now coming to the present situation, LCA Tejas is a multirole and single engine aircraft with primary role of ground attack . Though India is replacing the MiG 21 and MiG 27s but by inducting only 123 LCA Tejas will not replace all the ageing aircrafts. Thus India urgently needs another 100–120 single engine aircrafts. This results in Indian government bidding for a global tender for single engine combat ready aircrafts. The final contenders are Lockheed Martin F-16 Falcon and SAAB Gripen E. According to the agreement, these companies have to tie up with an Indian Firm to make aircraft so that the latter can learn more through ToT or Transfer Of Technology. Thus we actually need aircrafts and not specifically F16 . But since Lockheed Martin took a leap in signing with TASL, it has been making dilemma among the common Indians. But Indian government and IAF are clear with its stand on their requirements. So may be F16 can get an edge over Gripen E, but no wonder if the table changes upside down, since SAAB is in talks with Mahindra Aerospace.LCA TejasF16 FulcrumGripen EThe moral is India needs a better aircraft whether it be F16 or Gripen-E. I believe that this situation will also change in near ten years, may be TASL or Mahindra Aerospace will come with better aircraft that IAF needs at that time.Thank you for reading.
Trusted esignature solution— what our customers are saying
be ready to get more
Get legally-binding signatures now!
Frequently asked questions
How do i add an electronic signature to a word document?
When a client enters information (such as a password) into the online form on , the information is encrypted so the client cannot see it. An authorized representative for the client, called a "Doe Representative," must enter the information into the "Signature" field to complete the signature.
How to make an electronic signature from a scan?
The only place I found information about this was in the State University's "Electronic Security (CEC) Course". It is not a prerequisite, so the only thing you need to do is read the entire class description and then just start working on getting the software, which is freely released, on your phone. If you are a student with an iPhone, just scroll to Chapter 3 and start doing stuff. There are a lot of cool apps for this.
Why is it a big deal to have an "electronic signature" on my files?
In the world of digital signatures, it is the most important thing.
For an image, you do this by signing it with an image signature.
What is an image signature?
You can imagine your document as a digital signature, but it's made by signing an image with an image.
This method is used by the federal government when they print out documents and when they scan documents to keep them in digital form. In general, any digital information, from your passport to a document in the state DMV, is an image signature.
So, let's say that I have a document I scanned that says "The State of New York Department of Transportation" and I want people to know that it is an actual document that contains my name, my signature, and my image. How do I do this?
You can use an image signature on your scanned document.
If you don't have an image to use, you can use "Digital signature" to use the same image. You just need to sign off using your name, your signature, and the image on your document.
So, ho...
How to do the electronic signature online?
The online form to electronically sign is available at
What are your responsibilities with regard to electronic signature?
We expect the electronic signature to be entered in the appropriate data field (not the signature field). For example, if the signature is being electronically entered on your behalf, it would appear in Section A2 of the electronic signature (not Section A1). This ensures the signature is correctly entered.
Who must I contact with questions regarding electronic signature and my personal information?
If the signature in Section A2 is not entered correctly, or if your signature information is incorrect, call us at (or outside the ) or click on any of the links below from any web site:
You may also visit the following links:
Who is responsible for ensuring the accuracy of electronic signatures in Section A2, and why?
The person who creates and signs electronic documents must know the following:
The person who electronically signs the document must have sufficient knowledge of electronic signature technology to correctly enter the signature.
The person who electronically signs the document must have the authority to sign the document. For example, the individual who electronically signs our signature is a "representative" of the Crown and is responsible to the Government of Canada under section 10 of the Constitution Act, 1867, as well as under section of the Privacy Act.
The person who electronically signs the document must be able to sign...
Get more for eSign Word for Procurement Now
- How Can I Electronic signature Delaware Courts Word
- Help Me With Electronic signature Delaware Courts Word
- How Can I Electronic signature Delaware Courts Word
- Can I Electronic signature Delaware Courts PDF
- Can I Electronic signature Delaware Courts Word
- Can I Electronic signature Delaware Courts Word
- How To Electronic signature Delaware Courts PDF
- How Do I Electronic signature Delaware Courts PDF
Find out other eSign Word for Procurement Now
- Sales ampamp use tax license inspection baldwin county form
- Cancellation of abn or llp doc form
- 504 corporationsupporting the financial needs of small form
- Claim number winner claim form montana lottery
- Sunvalleyidaho govverticalsitesbuilding code design review other state and federal permits form
- Supplier unconditional final waiver and release form
- Baker chamber of commerce membership application form
- Form w 4 employees withholding certificate 702793575
- Njsourcedocndapplication exemption for sales tax pdf form
- Fincen currency transaction report fincen ctr form
- If you change your business name mailing address location form
- Employer payroll tax upload service form
- Instructions for preparing form dr 908 florida insurance
- How to file and pay sales tax in florida form
- Dr 15 sales and use tax instructions form
- Irs form f 1120 florida corporate tax return
- Form 1 nrpy mass nonresidentpart year resident tax
- Florida annual resale certificate for sales t 701403194 form
- Chapter 12 26 form
- Form 1 nrpy massachusetts nonresidentpart year tax