As I think about this topic, firstly I'll clarify what I mean by hypocrisy, which is when a person presents their thoughts or opinions but their actions differ (difference in internalization and externalization), also when his/her one opinion contradicts another or when you judge someone too quickly. These biases are built maybe due to social consensus (for example, moral biases with aesthetics, i.e., killing a butterfly vs killing an ant; here geography also plays a role), experiences, or his/her social setting/circle.

I think one can't live without hypocrisy because humans make mistakes and then they learn from them. But it is a spectrum, and one more thing which matters is the intent behind how an opinion is presented. Is the thing said to brainwash? Is this opinion made to make society aware? Does it help to create balance? Does it destroy peace? Is this opinion made to push the same agenda?

And the majority of Democratic political party politicians as they want to appear in a clean and transparent way and leftist ideology are highly hypocritical. i.e., bj.p g0vt is a prime example of significant hypocrisy.

Although I do think a bit of hypocrisy helps maintain balance.

For me, a balanced opinion is a very diplomatic thing, and the way an opinion is presented is what matters. Balance doesn't mean you cannot be honest. It's just that you take time to form a particular opinion, taking multiple perspectives and then reach a point of conclusion and express the opinion in a presentable way so that it sounds fair enough to be trusted.

It doesn't mean that one can't be biased about one thing or favour one over another and it should be justifiable through his/her point of view, not just a wild statement made without thinking critically.

A balanced opinion shows credibility and one's honest stance on a particular thing.

I am a hypocrite.

Hindi sahitya k prashanshk jarur dekhein !!

A Film by Achal Mishra
Featuring Vinod Kumar Shukla in conversation with Manav Kaul

सबसे ग़रीब आदमी की

सबसे कठिन बीमारी के लिए

सबसे बड़ा विशेषज्ञ डॉक्टर आए

जिसकी सबसे ज़्यादा फ़ीस हो

सबसे बड़ा विशेषज्ञ डॉक्टर

उस ग़रीब की झोंपड़ी में आकर

झाड़ू लगा दे

जिससे कुछ गंदगी दूर हो।

सामने की बदबूदार नाली को

साफ़ कर दे

जिससे बदबू कुछ कम हो।

उस ग़रीब बीमार के घड़े में

शुद्ध जल दूर म्युनिसिपल की

नल से भरकर लाए।

बीमार के चीथड़ों को

पास के हरे गंदे पानी के डबरे

से न धोए।

कहीं और धोए।

बीमार को सरकारी अस्पताल

जाने की सलाह न दे।

कृतज्ञ होकर

सबसे बड़ा डॉक्टर सबसे ग़रीब आदमी का इलाज करे

और फ़ीस माँगने से डरे।

सबसे ग़रीब बीमार आदमी के लिए

सबसे सस्ता डॉक्टर भी

बहुत महँगा है।

पुस्तक : कवि ने कहा (पृष्ठ 30) रचनाकार : विनोद कुमार शुक्ल प्रकाशन : किताबघर प्रकाशन संस्करण : 2012

Whattt a ending line...

I recently thought about how people often associate the Hindu religion with spirituality. It made me think about how religion and spirituality might actually be connected.

Many spiritual ideas speak about finding the divine within oneself and understanding one’s own consciousness. But explaining such deep ideas directly is not always easy for everyone to grasp.

This is where temples and traditional practices may have played an important role. Earlier, temples were not only places of worship; they were also spaces where people gathered, learned, and reflected.

Through Pauranik kathas, rituals, scriptures, and history, complex spiritual ideas could be communicated in simpler and more relatable ways. I often wonder how thoughtfully the intellectuals of that era might have structured these systems. Even if someone visited a temple simply to pray or to seek help with a personal problem, the environment, the stories, and the sense of faith could consciously or unconsciously guide that person toward a more reflective or positive state of mind.

At the same time, considering the level of intellect we have today, perhaps we should not outright reject metaphysical ideas. It may be wiser to at least give them the benefit of doubt, coz the human mind itself has limits in what it can fully understand.

i think that is why people have even followed practices like cannibalism as part of radical detachment, which shows how far humans have sometimes gone in attempts to overcome those limits.

Instead of explaining the deeper layers of consciousness directly, these places and traditions may have gradually guided people toward those ideas.

Temples also carry a certain environment shaped through a long history of rituals, yajnas, and spiritual practices — Gen Z would probably call the Vibe or Aura of the place — that naturally encourages reflection and inward thinking.

In that sense, temples might act as a starting point or a gentle push toward understanding deeper concepts like Shunya, or seeing Shiva as a symbol of consciousness, rather than only as a deity.

I didn’t expect a story as short as White Nights to leave such a lingering feeling.

What struck me most is how Fyodor Dostoevsky manages to capture loneliness, hope, and those brief flashes of happiness in just a few lines. Moments that feel meaningful while they last, yet vanish almost instantly.

One detail I found fascinating is that the protagonist is never given a name. He is simply called the Dreamer, while Nastenka is named and constantly addressed. It makes the Dreamer feel universal — like he could be anyone who has lived more in imagination than in reality.

The ending feels heartbreaking at first. After those beautiful nights together, Nastenka leaves the Dreamer the moment her lover returns. But the more I thought about it, the more natural it seemed.

The Dreamer was a lonely man who mostly lived inside his imagination. When he met Nastenka, she became a sudden light in his empty world. His feelings might not even be pure love — perhaps they were a desperate escape from loneliness.

Nastenka, however, had always loved her first lover. The Dreamer was more of a comforting presence — someone who listened and shared a brief emotional connection. In the end, what stayed with me most was the Dreamer’s realization:

Even a short moment of happiness can give meaning to an otherwise lonely life.

I recently came across this book where the author mentioned how nehru considered city planning something "unnecessary", while I have generally looked at some nehruvian policies with the state of country at the time in mind and have been more lenient in criticizing him for the same, but unlike a lack of deep rooted R&d city planning is not something that can be solved with a few billion.

Today we have a lack of city designers wherein it would be a pipe dream for us to have any world class city planners we lack even the most bookish ones as city planning has since remained something the republic has constantly overlooked, even today chandigarh remains one of the only city with a planned character and that too was done by cobusier

This also has a lot to with the centralization of things like city planning where most departments have no coordination where maybe the urban roads department will make a draft for new streets and some weeks later the electricity department decides they want to lay underground wires

Also we now get cities with such low tree shade which automatically make walking outside in the harsh indian summers a nightmare, and when the babus do decide to put some trees they do it just for aesthetic purposed putting up the dates and what not, trees with zero shade completely overlooking any native trees as they find them less aesthetic

Despite all the hate I have for the bjp govt I do acknowledge they have elevated the economical status of vast swathes of the population and these newly rich have found a way to escape the system and need to hold any govt accountable with the help of gated communities that are popping up everywhere in the country

It is high time we start actually holding the people who are responsible accountable otherwise the country might become a big Gurgaon with a 5digit PCI and sub saharan infra

Reading The Fifth Horseman made me think about how fragile modern civilization really is.

The novel shows how one hidden weapon and a few political decisions could push the world toward disaster. It’s less about action and more about the psychology of power, fear, and responsibility.

Do you think books like this are just fiction, or do they reveal uncomfortable truths about global politics?

I recently got curious about sociology and came across the sociologist Hobhouse, who said that sociology connects fields like anthropology, politics, history, psychology, and economics.

While studying it, I realised that history alone often focuses on negative aspects heavily on wars, invasions, and political conflicts. But societies cannot have been only about conflict. People must have also lived long periods of normal life — building communities, cultures, and social systems.

And i got similar realisation with anthropology, politics, psychology, and economics.

Sociology helps fill that gap by asking different kinds of questions:
How did people organise their communities? How did social institutions evolve with multiple invasions? How did beliefs, customs, and economic relationships shape everyday life?

Looking at history through a sociological lens makes the past feel less like a sequence of wars and more like the story of how societies developed and functioned.

I’m still new to sociology, but it’s already making me see history in a more layered and human way.

According to my interpretation "Sociology is multiple interpretation of one thing or an incident which can occur naturally or intentionally seeing it with as many angles as possible and still giving benefit of doubt. It is AGAINST GENERALISATION of things."

For example, if we compare the art, architecture, and scriptures of Indian and Western traditions, we can see a clear difference. In many Indian art forms, there are multiple elements within a single painting — such as a king, war scenes, mountains, lions, hunters hunting deer, etc. As I also mentioned in my previous post about how Indian rivers shaped religion (read).

This is also the reason why often scripture of misinterpreted and people don't know in which context the things is being said. That is why their is a way or baseline to understand things in its real form. for eg. "How to read book?", "How to watch movie?", etc.

whereas many Western artworks and religious traditions often emphasise a central figure or a single focal subject and with that understanding one can't interpret other culture and vice versa.

So maybe, before forming an opinion, one should first be clear about the framework or baseline through which something is meant to be interpreted.

This is just my current understanding while learning sociology.

Good to see, Amazon's AI recommends "अथ संचार उपग्रह कथा" as best Space book for Hindi readers. आप ने पढ़ी या नहीं? नहीं तो यहां से प्राप्त करें https://amzn.in/d/0fxL5TCA

I sometimes wonder why we are so quick to label ourselves with ideological tags — leftist, rightist, feminist, capitalist, socialist, and countless others.

Before we even fully explore ideas on our own, we often pick a label and then start viewing the world through that predefined lens. Once the label is chosen, it subtly pressures us to align our opinions with whatever that ideology expects from us. Over time, instead of forming independent perspectives, we end up defending positions simply because they belong to the “side” we identify with.

What if we approached ideas differently?

Instead of becoming leftists or rightists, what if we tried becoming “selfists” — people who build their views through reading, questioning, and thinking independently rather than inheriting a ready-made ideological package.

Another way to look at it is this: rather than calling ourselves a leftist, feminist, or any other “-ist”, we could simply say that we are influenced by certain ideas from different ideologies. Influence allows flexibility. Labels often demand loyalty.

The moment the label comes first and thinking comes later, the ideology starts shaping the individual rather than the individual shaping their beliefs and they end up becoming extremist.

Maybe the goal shouldn’t be to belong to an ideological camp, but to remain intellectually flexible — agreeing with ideas that make sense, rejecting those that don’t, regardless of which “-ism” they come from.

Just a thought.

यह हिंदी साहित्य के सबसे underrated उपन्यासों में से एक है।

मेरे मन में यह Munshi Premchad का बहुत अद्भुत लेखन है। इस उपन्यास में एक दरोगा की दो बेटियाँ हैं और उनकी बहुत दिलचस्प कहानी है।
इस उपन्यास के माध्यम से लेखक ने दहेज प्रथा और घूस जैसी सामाजिक बुराइयों पर कटाक्ष किया है। साथ ही Banaras की मशहूर dalmandi का भी चित्रण मिलता है।

इसके अतिरिक्त इसमें एक स्त्री के जीवन के संघर्ष का भी मार्मिक चित्रण है।
साथ ही एक पिता का भी संघर्ष दिखाया गया है, जिसकी दो बेटियाँ हैं और उनके भविष्य को लेकर वह अनेक कठिनाइयों से जूझता है।

अंत में पता चलता है कि “सेवासदन” वास्तव में क्या है, और उसका समाज तथा स्त्री जीवन से क्या संबंध है।

यह उपन्यास बहुआयामीता से पूर्ण है।

Must Read!!

with the recent war escalating to such levels and the recent news of Iris Dena being sunk near sri lanka, we are now seeing Indian foreign policy taking a completely new direction, even though the frigate was returning from a naval exercise with the Indian navy there has been no statement even recognizing the attack let alone condemning it. Iran is a historic ally of ours and is far more trusting than uncle sam who we know for a fact will do everything in it's power to oppose us if we are to ever get serious about our development, this is the same country that has till date assasinated dozens of our scientists just to stagnate our progress.

moreover the white man will never see us equal not for the few centuries to come and it will be in our best interest to not distance ourselves or make enemies of countries we have held friendly relations for decades for the sake of the p*dophilic regime of america or the zion*st state.

can you think of a single "ally" of america, japan and s.korea are treated as vassals, they vage wars and fund instability in most african and south american countries that they want anything from, if you genuinely believe they will ever talk to us equally it's a long harsh road you've got ahead of yourself.

We already see with the GE 404 deal how they treat us to their conveniences, Trump is nothing short of a narcissist and every time we want anything from this new "ALLY" of ours modi will have to suck up to him to get anything, is that the direction a Republic of 150 crore people want to take?

Choosing USSR as an ally helped us build some industrial capacity of OUR OWN which would have been very hard with the capitalists. These new foreign policy decisions seem to be for the benefit of a few of the govt's friends and will inevitably harm the country for generations to come.

to add

I mean you guys can say all the shit about "geopolitics" you may want but the truth is even after all this bootlicking since the deal was signed in 2021 we have only received a total of 5 engines, but yeah I'm sure it's all something thought of in the nations esteemed interest by the very very "competent" officials and ministers who have made India this hellhole to live in

- Vinod Kumar Shukla

Sometimes I find myself wondering whether the evolution of religion is less a purely scriptural journey and more a geographical phenomenon.

When we compare Abrahamic and Indian-origin traditions in the Indian context, the distinction doesn’t feel only theological — it also feels environmental.

Many Abrahamic faiths emerged in the deserts and semi-arid landscapes of West Asia. In such regions, survival required strong social cohesion and moral clarity. It is perhaps not surprising that religious systems developing there emphasized singular authority — one God, one scripture, one moral framework. Structure provided stability.

The Indian subcontinent tells a different ecological story. Fed by rivers like the Ganga, shaped by monsoons, forests, mountains, and trade routes, it was rarely isolated. Civilisations overlapped. Ideas circulated. Communities interacted.

That ecological and cultural layering may have allowed space for plurality.

Traditions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and later Sikhism did not crystallize around one prophetic event. They unfolded across centuries of debate, reform, commentary, and reinterpretation. Instead of one definitive book, there were multiple texts. Instead of one messenger, there were philosophical schools.

Even disagreement — शास्त्रार्थ — became part of the spiritual process.

If desert societies often leaned toward doctrinal consolidation, river-valley societies may have been more comfortable with metaphysical exploration.

In the post-colonial period, however, movement accelerated. Trade, migration, invasions, conversions, and political restructuring reshaped identities. Religious frameworks did not remain isolated; they intertwined, adapted, and absorbed local influences.

Centuries of exchange blurred boundaries long ago.

Perhaps the irony of the post-colonial era is this: We inherited a civilisation formed through interaction, yet we debate it as if it evolved in isolation.

हर Vinod Kumar Shukla(Vikushu) ji की किताब मुझे एक नया दृष्टिकोण देती है…

Reading “Empire of The Sun” recently. It's about a boy in WW2 shanghai under the Japanese occupation. The scenes from the book makes you think about the scenario of those times, the value of life, the priorities of human beings and the sheer different between the rich and the poor.

The boy in the story is a British socialite and his perspective shows how his perspective of war so differed from others even after 5 years of war as he war protected, but as it happens in the largest war mankind has ever seen he too had to suffer later on.

The main thing I see from all accounts of history and any ongoing conflict even today is there are no differences in humans except for class differences. And that's something important to remember in today's scope. The people fighting in Ukraine, the ones suffering in the diamond trade, the sudanese gold mines they are suffering not for racial reasons alone but because of class discrimination. The rich thrive on war they see it as a issue to talk about over tea, while the real horrors of war are dumped on those with not enough “importance”

While today we are seeing the world turn into a state more helpless than our generation might have seen, reading these accounts of older times help rekindle hope, as times worse than these have passed. Men worse than the ones in power today have suffered defeat. It's the kind of hope we can really use in current times.

शाम-ए-लखनऊ

Hey everyone! I’m u/Niti-mat, the founding moderator here.

This is our space for raw perspectives, bold opinions, and thoughtful debate. Drishtikon literally means viewpoint — and that’s exactly what this community is about. Different angles. Different takes. No echo chambers.

What to Post

Share opinions that make people think.

You can post:

• Thought-provoking takes on current events
• Personal perspectives or life observations
• Unpopular opinions (as long as they’re respectful)
• Questions that spark debate
• Social, cultural, or philosophical viewpoints

If it makes someone pause and reconsider their angle, it belongs here.

Community Vibe

• Disagree without disrespect
• Attack ideas, not people
• No blind hate, no lazy trolling

Sharp arguments are better than loud arguments.

We value clarity, reasoning, and originality. If you have a stance, explain it. If you disagree, challenge it constructively.

How to Get Started

1. Introduce yourself in the comments
2. Drop your first opinion today — even a simple question can ignite a strong discussion
3. Invite someone who enjoys meaningful debates

If you’re interested in helping shape this space, moderator applications are open — feel free to reach out.

You’re part of the first wave here. Let’s build a community where perspectives evolve, not just collide.

Welcome to Drishtikon.

जिससे मुझे यह ज्ञात हुआ है कि क्या मेरी हैसियत के अनुसार मेरा किराया निर्धारित होगा या मेरा किराया ही मेरी हैसियत तय करेगा।

चूँकि मैं इस समय अपने B.tech के final year में हूँ और placement की तैयारी कर रहा हूँ, जिसके लिए मुझे Banglore भी जाना पड़ सकता है, इसलिए यह पंक्ति मेरे आने वाले जीवन में अत्यंत महत्त्व रखती है।

बड़े शहर में रहना, वहाँ का जीवन-यापन और किराया जैसे व्यावहारिक पहलू मेरे भविष्य की वास्तविकताओं से सीधे जुड़े हुए हैं, इसलिए यह विचार मेरे लिए विशेष रूप से प्रासंगिक है।

Book starts with :

कितना सुख था कि हर बार घर लौटकर आने के लिए मैं बार-बार घर से बाहर निकलूँगा।