As practiced by Socrates in the Cratylus, etymology involves a claim about the underlying semantic content of the name, what it really means or indicates. This content is taken to have been put there by the ancient name-givers: giving an etymology is thus a matter of unwrapping or decoding a name to find the message the name-givers have placed inside.
Understanding why and how languages differ tells about the range of what is human, discovering what’s universal about languages can help us understand the core of our humanity.
Addictio, the abstract noun derived from the verb, was the technical Latin term for the judicial act by which a debtor was made the slave of his creditor.
The sentence was pronounced, or spoken, by the judge, or praetor, according to the ancient law of the Twelve Tables. Where exactly did this leave the addictus, which in the passive form referred to the hapless individual who was physically handed over to his creditor by the praetor’s authority and physically led off in chains, to be held for sixty days or until the debt was paid? Failure to pay the debt after the lapse of the statutory sixty days rendered the debtor his creditor’s permanent property. He could then, at the creditor’s discretion, be kept, killed or sold as a common slave.
For the Romans, enslavement became increasingly associated with the passive forms of addicere, which of necessity would take on a very different connotation from the active form. To understand this, one must appreciate the distinction Romans made between active and passive forms of the verb, and in fact between active and passive in all forms of behavior. To be the recipient, to be acted upon, was to be less than. A passive human subject was a defeated individual, the object of someone else’s power. Being sentenced to be another person’s slave would be particularly humiliating. It would mean not only the loss of one’s citizenship but of one’s personhood.
The theme continued to be developed well into the imperial period. The most striking aspect of the use of addicere in each of these instances is the idea of bondage or enslavement. However, the object of that enslavement had evolved over the course of six centuries. What started as literal, the fate of the debt bondsman (addictus) under the ancient Law of the Twelve Tables, became metaphorical. One could become enslaved by vice (e.g., gambling, drinking, gluttony). A behavior like gambling, which previously might have led to one’s being sentenced into slavery, now was the enslavement.
The English verb ‘addict’ found particular resonance among the early church reformers. It’s earliest known appearance in English was in a tract by the Protestant reformer John Frith. It involves the act of choosing between two or more things. He apparently understood it as ‘preference’ or ‘choice,’ meaning (in a Christian context) the individual’s preference for a particular doctrine or interpretation of the Bible. [The Church] emphasized the dangers associated with a mistaken choice (Catholicism, the Pope, icons and idols). Most prominent was the danger of grievously offending God or of being led down the wrong path away from God. The Reformers extended their concerns to the physical realm, where one could be addicted to physical pleasures like gluttony and drunkenness.
Such ‘choices’ need not be actively chosen, however. The most influential of the Protestant Reformers next to Luther, John Calvin, [believed] man was so corrupted and enslaved by sin that he was incapable of choosing correctly. It was only through God’s grace that one was turned away from depravity and bad choices. An accomplished Latinist and writing in Latin, Calvin drew upon the legal, rather than the augural, usage of the Latin verb addicere to indicate that it is something done to or for one; it is not voluntary or within one’s control. This would be in line with the early legal meaning of addictio in Latin, where one did not act freely but was acted upon by the law [and] made the slave of one’s creditor.
[Writers from the 16th century on] were using medical metaphors to convey the seriousness of the problem, and we can't help noting that the language of disease was used both for the individual and for society. Furthermore, it was not addiction itself that was the disease, it was drunkenness or gambling, and when they referred to addiction, it was to convey ‘attachment’ or ‘preference.’
When the word addiction was deliberately omitted from four consecutive editions of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder, it was because it was considered pejorative, stigmatizing, and too difficult to define. There were simply ‘too many meanings’ the term lacked any ‘universally agreed upon definition’: the result of using it was ‘conceptual chaos’.
Inclusion in DSM-5 represents behavioral addiction’s first official recognition as a diagnostic entity. It is therefore especially notable that, in addition to the lack of a definition, there are neither criteria nor guidelines for the assessment of potential disorders.
The army action was not a last resort as Prime Minister Indira Gandhi would have us believe. It had been in her mind for more than 18 months. The army had begun rehearsals of a commando attack near Chakrata Cantonment in the Doon Valley, where a complete replica of the Golden Temple complex had been built.[14] (bold ours)General S. K. Sinha further states in the same interview that towards the end of 1981, he received a call from someone in Delhi informing him of the government’s decision to attack Darbar Sahib.[15] This makes it clear that the decision to attack Darbar Sahib had been made at least two and a half years prior to execution and its preparations had begun more than 18 months prior.
A British correspondent of the 'Sunday Times’, London, noted: “Last week’s assault on the Golden Temple took place after months of preparation of the Indian army, which included advice from British experts in counter-insurgency. Sources in Delhi say that two officers of the Indian secret service, Gary Saxena and R.N. Kay, of the Research and Analysis Wing made several trips to London to seek expertise. The Indian Government then selected 600 men from different units and sent them to rehearse the assault on a life size replica of the Golden Temple, built at a secret training camp in the Chakrata Hills, about 150 miles north of Delhi. The assault troops were alerted to invade the Temple no fewer than five times during the past three months, but each time Mrs. Gandhi vetoed the invasion.[17]How can the violent military strike be defensible on the grounds that militants were present in the temple when all the facts, including statements from high-ranking Indian Army officials, show that an attack was being planned since 1981? At this moment in time, Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale or other so-called militants were not even inside the complex. In view of military preparations, no honest and true Sikh would sit around unprepared to let an enemy attack his holy place. When someone knows that his house will be attacked, he makes adequate preparations to defend it. No devout Sikh would ever tolerate or allow a military action against the very heart of Sikhi. It is an attack on the dignity, honor and prestige of the Sikhs.
Had the army given a warning, at least those pilgrims who had come for the Gurpurb could go out and then those persons who were simply here to participate in the Dharam Youdh Morcha could go out. But no warning was given to the people. The firing was started from all around the complex with vengeance, as if they were attacking an alien, enemy country.[24]This makes it abundantly clear that the Indian army without giving any warning began the assault with scores of heavy artillery shells being blasted into the holy shrine. This raises serious concerns over the army’s actions in contrast to how other governments have dealt with similar situations. The Indian Government was hell-bent on the attack and preferred a conflict rather than diplomacy. Hence, the attack was by no means a last resort.
The day of attack, 3rd June 1984, which was being observed as martyrdom day of Guru Arjan Dev Ji, was intentionally chosen by Indira Gandhi and her Hindu government mainly for two reasons. Firstly, she wanted to show indignity to the religious heritage of the Sikhs and challenge their faith. Secondly, she wanted to entrap and massacre as many Sikhs as possible because they had assembled there in large numbers.[29]All of these points prove that the attack was planned ahead and its day and time were deliberately chosen to try and give a crushing blow to the Sikh spirit."
"The tradition of arming the Sikhs was introduced by Guru Hargobind Ji…He then instructed the Sikhs to offer him weapons and horses instead of money. He accepted weapons and horses at Akal Takhat Sahib from His followers…..Sant Bhindranwale simply revived this tradition in letter and spirit and gave it a new dimension by substituting revolvers and guns with swords and spears and motor cycle with horse. He therefore did not commit any offense by following the Gurus. The cynics may criticize him for revival of the age old tradition of the Khalsa.[48]" - Dr. A. R. Darshi , Darshi, p. 53Given the purpose and history of the Akal Takht, as well as the martial tradition of Sikhi, it's no surprise that weapons were kept. I would argue that it would be going against Sikh principles to not keep weapons and defend such a site. Often times when people think of holy sites, they think of them as purely spiritual, however in Sikhi we have the concept of "Miri-Piri", and mix the spiritual and temporal. There has allways been a historical precedence to keep weapons in the Darbar Sahib Complex, and that Sikhs follow a militaristic lifestyle that was set by the Guru himself.
"It's really shocking that we have so little against him while we keep blaming him for all sorts of things.[1]"Furthermore, Gurdev Singh, District Commissioner at Amritsar until shortly before the invasion is on record as having assured the Governor of the State that he could arrest anyone in Darbar Sahib at any time.[2] He made repeated pleas to the government not to take any adverse army action against Darbar Sahib but alas, no one paid attention to his requests.[3]"
"The whole administration of the State along with the railways and other transportation services including the postal and telecommunications were carried on or suspended, to suit the needs of the armed forces. The State police service virtually ceased to exist as massive purge operation went on and its various functions were taken over by the army personnel i.e. such functions as frisking, searching and arresting people, performing security duties, regulating movement of transport and men, guarding railway tracks, canals etc. and other installations of public utility. Thus on June 2, the army took over the administration, and whatever vestiges of a civilised government had remained vanished.[31]"Electricity and phone lines were cut off, disconnecting Punjab from the rest of the world. The propaganda ministers (government reporters) have no answer as to why the entire Punjab was sealed off when the so-called terrorists were only “hiding” inside the Darbar Sahib complex.[32] All of the reporters were escorted out so that no unbiased coverage of the operation could be published or aired.[33] Only government paid reporters were allowed to remain behind in Punjab so that the government could have full control over the media reporting and the only story coming out of such coverage could be the official story covered in lies, propaganda and deceit. Gurdarshan Singh Dhillon corroborates:
"News censorship was ordered for a period of two months. All the foreign journalists were rounded up and expelled from the State under military escort so much so that all the leading newspapers of the State had to suspend publication for three days. All war time emergency measures were brought into force. Life came to a standstill. The telephone connections of the Complex were disconnected on June 2 and the water and electricity supply were cut off on June 3.[34]"If the government had been honest and true to its own shambolic public statements, it would have allowed the media to freely cover the events as they took place and report the actual facts. This would have proved the government to be honest in its decisions and true to its word and deed. Instead, to the contrary, no free press was allowed and attempts were made to make the official story the only story.
"A doctor drafted in by the army to conduct examinations, reported how “Sikhs had been shot at point blank range with their hands tied behind their backs with their turbans. It was a virtual massacre with a large number of woman, children and pilgrims being gunned down”.[36]"Had the true motive behind the army action been to capture or kill militants inside the holy place, thousands of innocent Sikhs would not have been killed. Additionally, the army fortified the holy place for months after the attack when it should have handed back the control as soon as the operation was complete. During the army’s occupation, the holy place was desecrated in the worst possible ways that caused the historical accounts of the defilements carried out by the Mughal and Afghan raiders to pale in comparison. The army smoked and drank alcohol inside. The army kept their shoes on and turned the holy place into their base station. Thousands of Sikhs were taken as prisoners of war and put in jails without any charge or trial. Many of these prisoners are still languishing in jails. Even children as young as four years old were arrested.[39]
"On Sunday, Medical workers in Amritsar said Soldiers had threatened to shoot them if they gave food or water to dying Sikh pilgrims wounded in the assault lying in the hospital.[37]"
"On 4th June, when thousands of Sikhs had gathered at the Golden Temple, army tanks moved into the Temple complex, smashing into the sanctum sanctorum and shooting everyone in sight. Many wounded were left to bleed to death and when they begged for water soldiers told them to drink the mixture of blood and urine on the floor.[38]"
"The army went into Darbar Sahib not to eliminate a political figure or a political movement but to suppress the culture of a people, to attack their heart, to strike a blow at their spirit and self-confidence.[40]"Therefore, it was not an attack to free the holy place from supposed terrorists but it was itself a state sponsored act of terrorism against the Sikh religion. The army was the real culprit behind terrorism and it was a calculated use of extreme violence and terror by the government to inculcate fear in the minds of the Sikhs so that never again do they dare raise their voice against the oppression, injustice and tyranny of the Indian government. Hence, the Sikhs were the true defenders against the Indian terrorists.
"I don't oppose it nor do I support it. We are silent. However, one thing is definite that if this time the Queen of India does give it to us, we shall certainly take it. We won't reject it. We shall not repeat the mistake of 1946. As yet, we do not ask for it. It is Indira Gandhi's business and not mine, nor Longowal's, nor of any other of our leaders. It is Indira's business. Indira should tell us whether she wants to keep us in Hindustan or not. We like to live together, we like to live in India."He then followed up by stating:
"if the Indian Government invaded the Darbar Sahib complex, the foundation for an independent Sikh state will have been laid."Quote Sources: Sandhu (1999), p. LVII.
instinctive definition: 1. Instinctive behaviour or reactions are not thought about, planned, or developed by training: 2…. Learn more. tran·si·tion (trăn-zĭsh′ən, -sĭsh′-) n. 1. Change from one form, state, style, or place to another. 2. a. Change from one subject to another in discourse. b. A word, phrase, sentence, or series of sentences connecting one part of a discourse to another. 3. Music a. Change from one key or tonality to another. b. A passage connecting two themes ... How to say judiciously in Hindi What's the Hindi word for judiciously? Here's a list of translations. Hindi Translation. विवेकपूर्ण तरीके से vivekapoorn tareeke se. More Hindi words for judiciously. hastily definition: 1. said or done in a hurry, sometimes without the necessary care or thought: 2. said or done in a…. Learn more. English to Punjabi Dictionary - Meaning of Judiciously in Punjabi is : ਵਿਅਕਤੀ ਜਿੱਤ what is meaning of Judiciously in Punjabi language Synonyms for judiciously include shrewdly, intelligently, astutely, wisely, cunningly, perspicaciously, sagaciously, knowingly, alertly and craftily. Find more ... 1 A tube used to convey liquid upwards from a reservoir and then down to a lower level of its own accord. Once the liquid has been forced into the tube, typically by suction or immersion, flow continues unaided. English to Afrikaans Dictionary - Meaning of Judiciously in Afrikaans is : oordeelkundig what is meaning of Judiciously in Afrikaans language We would like to show you a description here but the site won’t allow us. Judiciously meaning in Hindi : Get meaning and translation of Judiciously in Hindi language with grammar,antonyms,synonyms and sentence usages. Know answer of question : what is meaning of Judiciously in Hindi? Judiciously ka matalab hindi me kya hai (Judiciously का हिंदी में मतलब ). Judiciously meaning in Hindi (हिन्दी मे मीनिंग ) is ...
[index] [6782] [8807] [5012] [9444] [9936] [7277] [5830] [2974] [9708] [3966]
Copyright © 2024 m.grandstavka.site