एक छोटी कहानी - जो काफी पुरानी है

हमारे एक बुजुर्ग हैं जो छोटी-छोटी कहानियाँ सुनाते रहते हैं। यह इन्हीं की सुनाई हुई एक छोटी कहानी है। आगे बढ़ने से पहले यह बता दूँ कि यह कहानी पूरी तरह से काल्पनिक है, इसका किसी से कोई सम्बन्ध नहीं है और यदि किसी को ऐसा लगता है कि तो यह मात्र एक संयोग होगा क्योंकि यह कहानी आज से 10 साल पहले सुनाई गई थी।

"एक बंदर था, दिन भर खूब उछल-कूद करता था, पेड़ों पर सरपट चढ़ जाता था। बंदर की प्रवीणता को देख कर जंगल के जानवरों ने इसे अपना मुखिया चुन लिया। कुछ दिनों के बाद जंगल में आग लग गई और चारों ओर फैलने लगी। घबराये हुये जानवर बन्दर से आग रोकने के लिये जरूरी व्यवस्था को दुरुस्त करने की माँग लेकर पहुँचने लगे।जानवर जब मदद के लिये बंदर के पास जाते तो बंदर सरपट पेड़ पर चढ़ जाता, फिर तुरंत पेड़ से नीचे उतरता, और फिर पेड़ पर चढ़ जाता, एक पेड़ से दूसरे पेड़ पर उछल-कूद करने लगता। सभी जानवर यह देख कर हैरान थे।लेकिन जंगल में ये बात फैल गई कि बंदर के पास जब भी कोई शिकायत लेकर जाता है तो बंदर शिकायत सुनने के बाद इधर से उधर इस पेड़ से उस पेड़ पर गुलाटी मारता रहता है।

आखिर में बेहाल होकर सारे जानवरों ने बैठक बुलाई और तय किया की बंदर से मिला जाय और जंगल में लगी आग से हो रही दुर्दशा के बारे में चर्चा की जाय। सारे जानवर इकट्ठे होकर बंदर के पास पहुँच गए। कहने लगे जंगल में भयानक आग लगी है जो लगातार फैल रही है और जनवर उसकी चपेट में आकर मर रहे हैं। लेकिन आपके पास जब कोई शिकायत लेकर आता है तो आप सिर्फ इस पेड़ से उस पेड़ पर गुलाटी मरते रहते हैं।

बंदर ने कहा भाई आप शिकायत लेकर आते हैं तो मैं गुलाटी मारता हूँ क्योंकि मेरी यही खूबी है, मेरी कोशिशों में अगर कोई कमी हो तो आप लोग मुझे दोषी ठहरा सकते हैं। मैं अपनी तरफ से बहुत ईमानदारी से कोशिश करता हूँ। मैं बहुत भाग-दौड़ कर रहा हूँ जो मैं कर सकता हूँ वो मैं कर रहा हूं। मैं बहुत मेहनत से अपने काम को अंजाम देता हूँ अब मेरी कोशिशें कामयाब नहीं होती तो मैं क्या कर सकता हूँ।

ये सुनकर सारे जानवरों ने बन्दर को उसकी गद्दी से नीचे खींचकर इतनी कुटाई की कि बंदर डर कर भाग खड़ा हुआ और फिर कभी वापस जंगल नहीं लौटा। और सभी  आपस में मिलकर जंगल की आग को बुझाने में जुट गये।" 

WhoWas Tolstoy - A Short Para by Gorky

I am posting this short paragraph written about Tolstoy by Russian writer Gorky. All who don't know who was Tolstoy, can read it and know him, as long as they know who Gorky was.

"I once saw him as, perhaps, no one has ever seen him. I was walking over to him at Gaspra along the coast, and behind Yussupor’s estate, on the shore among the stones I saw his smallish, angular figure in a gray, crumpled, ragged suit and crumpled hat. He was sitting with his head on his hands, the wind blowing the silvery hairs of his beard through his fingers: he was looking into the distance out to sea, and the little greenish waves rolled up obediently to his feet and fondled them as they were telling something about themselves to the old magician. It was a day of sun and cloud, and the shadows of the clouds glided over the stones, and with the stones the old man grew now bright and now dark. The bowlders were large, riven by cracks and covered with smelly seaweed; there had been a high tide. He, too, seemed to me like an old stone come to life, who knows all the beginnings and the ends of things, who considers when and what will be the end of the stone, of the grasses of the earth, of the waters of the sea, and of the whole universe from the pebble to the sun. And the sea is part of his soul, and everything around him comes from him, out of him. In the musing motionlessness of the old man I felt something fateful, magical, something which went down into the darkness beneath him and stretched up like a search-light into the blue emptiness above the earth; as though it were he, his concentrated will, which was drawing the waves to him and repelling them, which was ruling the movements of cloud and shadow, which was stirring the stones to life. Suddenly, in a moment of madness, I felt, “It is possible, he will get up, wave his hand, and the sea will become solid and glassy, the stones will begin to move and cry out, everything around him will come to life, acquire a voice, and speak in their different voices of themselves, of him, against him.” I cannot express in words what I felt rather than thought at that moment; in my soul there was joy and fear, and then everything blended in one happy thought: “I am not an orphan on the earth, so long as this man lives on it.”

“Reminiscences of Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoy” By Maxim Gorky

[https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/g/gorky/maksim/g66to/ ]

Anton Makarenko Quote "बच्चे मानवीय विचार का एक अभिन्न अंग हैं, ऐसा लगता है कि वे उस सीमा के निशान हैं, जिनसे अधिक नीचे कोई आदमी गिर नहीं सकता है"

"साहित्य के महारथियों के प्रति न्याय करने के लिये यह कहना होगा कि वे अपने पतित नायकों के प्रति क्रूर कभी नहीं रहे, इन लेखकों ने हमेशा ऐतिहासिक मानवतावाद के प्रतिनिधियों की हैसियत से अपनी बात कही, जो निसन्देह एक उपलब्धि है और मानवजाति का एक ्रआभूषण है। ऐसा प्रतीत होता है कि सारे अपराधों में विश्वासघात ही एक ऐसा अपराध है जिसे साहित्य में, ... कोई सहानुभूति नहीं मिली। शेष सभी (आपराधिक) मामलों में अपराधी या टुच्चे-बदमाशों के अन्धकारपूरित-अन्ताकरण में सदैव एक उजाला कोना, एक मरुद्यान होता है, जिसके प्रभाव की दया से नीच से नीचतम मनुष्य भी मनुष्य बने रहते हैं।

बहुधा, यह कोना अपने या किसी और के बच्चे के प्रति प्यार का कोना होता था। बच्चे मानवीय विचार का एक अभिन्न अंग हैं, ऐसा लगता है कि वे उस सीमा के निशान हैं, जिनसे अधिक नीचे कोई आदमी गिर नहीं सकता है। बच्चों के विरुद्ध अपराध मानवता की सीमा से नीचे है."

आन्तोन मकारेन्को

देश में घटित हो रहे बच्चों  के प्रति अपराध की घटनाओं और प्रशासन व राज्यसत्ता की आपराधिक लापरवाही के कारण बीमारी और कुपोषण से मर रहे बच्चों के बारे में संजीदगी से सोचें तो ऐसा लगता है कि वर्तमान समाज की मानवीयता नष्ट हो रही है। कुछ लोग उस सीमा तक असंवेदनसील हो चुके हैं कि उन्हे इंसान नहीं कहा जा सकता।

Image credit: https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2018/dec/07/schindler-s-list-in-retrospect-20181207/

"This is not yet scientific age" – by Richard Feynman

Richard Feynman

This is not yet scientific age.

– by Richard Feynman

Reading Richard Feynman in the present age of blind faith is like lighting a candle in the dark room. It is irony of our times that I see a lot of my friends from science and engineering background who are marching like laymen in the shadow of blind faith. I would like to share few paragraphs that I find fascinating about science and reasoning in the writing of Feynman. Here are some quotable paragraphs from the article “The Value Of Science” by Feynman,

“.. in order to progress we must recognize our ignorance and leave room for doubt. Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty - some most unsure, some nearly sure, but none absolutely certain.

“.. Our freedom to doubt was born out of a struggle against authority in the early days of science. It was a very deep and strong struggle: permit us to question - to doubt - to not be sure. I think that it is important that we do not forget this struggle and thus perhaps lose what we have gained. Herein lies a responsibility to society.

“We are all sad when we think of the wondrous potentialities human beings seem to have, as contrasted with their small accomplishments. Again and again people have thought that we could do much better. Those of the past saw in the nightmare of their times a dream for the future. We, of their future, see that their dreams, in certain ways surpassed, have in many ways remained dreams. The hopes for the future today are, in good share, those of yesterday.

“If we take everything into account - not only what the ancients knew, but all of what we know today that they didn’t know - then I think we must frankly admit that we do not know. But, in admitting this, we have probably found the open channel. This is not a new idea; this is the idea of the age of reason. This is the philosophy that guided the men who made the democracy that we live under. The idea that no one really knew how to run a government led to the idea that we should arrange a system by which new ideas could be developed, tried out, and tossed out if necessary, with more new ideas brought in - a trial-and-error system.

“.. openness of possibilities was an opportunity, and that doubt and discussion were essential to progress into the unknown. If we want to solve a problem that we have never solved before, we must leave the door to the unknown ajar.

“We are at the very beginning of time for the human race. It is not unreasonable that we grapple with problems. But there are tens of thousands of years in the future. Our responsibility is to do what we can, learn what we can, improve the solutions, and pass them on. It is our responsibility to leave the people of the future a free hand. In the impetuous youth of humanity, we can make grave errors that can stunt our growth for a long time. This we will do if we say we have the answers now, so young and ignorant as we are. If we suppress all discussion, all criticism, proclaiming “This is the answer, my friends; man is saved!” we will doom humanity for a long time to the chains of authority, confined to the limits of our present imagination. It has been done so many times before.

“It is our responsibility as scientists, knowing the great progress which comes from a satisfactory philosophy of ignorance, the great progress which is the fruit of freedom of thought, to proclaim the value of this freedom; to teach how doubt is not to be feared but welcomed and discussed; and to demand this freedom as our duty to all coming generations.”

Out of the cradle

onto dry land

here it is

standing:

atoms with consciousness;

matter with curiosity.

Stands at the sea,

wonders at wondering: I

a universe of atoms

an atom in the universe.

By Richard Feynman

Written in January 1988

विश्व पुस्तक मेले (2019) में एक दिन

आज पूरा दिन पुस्तचक मेले में बिताने का मौका मिला। आज पुस्तक मेले में प्रगतिशील साहित्य, देश के इतिहास, विश्व की क्रान्तियों के बारे में बताने वाली किताबों की दुकानों के बाहर अनेक नौजवानों और बुजुर्गों की भीड़ दिख रही थी। और बड़ी तादाद में लोग प्रगतिशील साहित्य खरीद भी रहे थे। ऐसा साहित्य जो हमें समाज को देखने की एक वैज्ञानिक दृश्टिकोंण देता है और एक नये भविष्य के सपने देखने के लिये प्ररित करता है।
राजनीतिक विचारधारा को बिना समझे अनुसरण करने वाले फेसबुक के "पढ़े-लिखे" भक्तों की बातें पढ़ कर और देश की मध्यवर्गीय आबादी की राजनीतिक चेतना का पिछड़ा स्तर और और उनकी राजनीतिक कूपमण्डूकता को देख कर जो निराशा होती है उसकी तुलना में आज पुस्तक मेले में प्रगतिशील साहित्य के स्टालों पर नौजवानो-बुजुर्गों की जो भीड़ दिख रही थी वह एक नई आशा पैदा करती है। 
मोबाइल और कम्प्यूटर की स्क्रीन से नज़रें हटा कर बाहर नजर डालें तो समझ में आता है कि फेसबुक पर बैठ-कर तथ्यों को बिना जांचे परखे अनर्गल पोस्ट करने वाले लोगों की बड़ी संख्या वास्तव में उतनी बड़ी नहीं है, बस उनके पास समय और सुविधायें अधिक हैं, इसलिये सेसल मीडिया पर शायद उनकी उपस्थिति भी ज्यादा नज़र आती है।
पुस्तक मेले में प्रेमचन्द, गोर्की, शरतचन्द्र, तोलस्तोय, मार्क्स, लेनिन, विश्व इतिहास से लेकर वैज्ञानिक भौतिकवाद, और दर्शन तथा भारत के इतिहास से सम्बन्धित किताबों के कई स्टाल थे, और इन स्टालों पर लोगों की भीड़ इस बात का संकेत थी कि अभी भी प्रगतिशील साहित्य की माँग करने वाले युवाओं की संख्या काफी अधिक है, जो अँखें बन्द कर के तथ्यों का अनुसरण करने की बजाय उनकी जांच परख कर समाज की वर्तमान परिस्थितियों को समझना चाहते है।

लू सुन की कहानी ‘एक पागल की डायरी’ के कुछ पन्ने।

लू सुन की इस कहानी को पढ़ते हुये हम वर्ग समाज में प्रतिस्पर्धा और पूँजी की अन्धी होड़ के बीच आत्म-केन्द्रित समाज में मानवीय संवेदनाओं और इंसान में मनुष्यता की निर्मम हत्या की एक झलक देखते हैं और उसकी बीभत्सतता को महशूस करते हैं, लेकिन अन्त में आशा की एक झलक भी देखते हैं, जिसका अन्त लू सुन इन शब्दों से करते हैं, “सम्भव है नई पीढ़ी के छोटे बच्चों ने अभी नर-मांस न खाया हो। इन बच्चों को तो बचा लें!”

कहानी के कुछ अंश,

“मैं उन लोगों को खूब जानता हूँ। किसी को एकदम मार डालने को ये तैयार नहीं हैं। ऐसा करने का साहस इन लोगों में नहीं है। परिणाम के भय से इनकी जान निकलती है, इसलिये यो लोग षड्यंत्र रचकर जाल बिछा रहे हैं.....।

“दूसरों को खा लेने का लालच, परन्तु स्वयं आहार बन जाने का भय। सबको दूसरों पर संदेह है, सब दूसरों से आशंकित हैं।...

यदि इस परस्पर भय से लोगों को मुक्ति मिल सके तो वे निश्शंक होकर काम कर सकते हैं, घूम-फिर सकते हैं, खा-पी सकते हैं। बस, मन से वह एक विचार निकाल देने की जरूरत है। परन्तु लोग यह कर नहीं पाते और बाप-बेटे, पति-पत्नी, भाई-भाई, मित्र, गुरु-शिष्य, एक दूसरे के कट्टर दुश्मन और यहाँ तक कि अपरिचित भी एक दूसरे को खा जाने के षड्यंत्र में शामिल हैं, दूसरों को भी इसमे घसीट रहे हैं और इस चक्कर से निकल जाने को कोई तैयार नहीं।

लोग अपना जीवन सुधारना चाहते थे। इसलिये वे सभ्य बन गए। उनमें मानवता आ गई। परन्तु कुछ लोग अब भी खाये जा रहे हैं – मगरमच्छों की तरह । कहते हैं जीवों का विकास होता है, एक जीव से दूसरा जीव बन जाता है। कुछ जीव विकास करके मछली बन गये हैं, पक्षी बन गये हैं, बंदर बन गये हैं। ऐसे ही इंसान भी बन गया है। परन्तु कुछ जीवों में विकास की इच्छा नहीं होती। उनका विकास वहीं होता, वे सुधरते ही नहीं, रेंगने वालें जानवर ही बने रहते हैं।

भविष्य में दुनिया में आदमखोरी नहीं चल सकेगी। अगर आदमखोरी नहीं छोड़ोगो तो तुम सब खत्म हो जाओगे, एक-दूसरे को खा जाओगे। तुम्हें तुरन्त बदलना होगा ! अपना मन बदलना होगा ! याद रखो, भविष्य में दुनिया में आदमखोरी नहीं चल सकेगी।....

मैं भले ही बेखबर रहा हूँ, मेरे पुरखे चार हजार वर्ष से आदमखोर रहे हैं। मेरे जैसा आदमी किसी सभ्य, वास्तविक मानव को अपना मुंह कैसे दिखा सकता है?

सम्भव है नई पीढ़ी के छोटे बच्चों ने अभी नर-मांस न खाया हो। इन बच्चों को तो बचा लें!

Excerpts of Analysis about Inner Struggle of Isolated Individuals from Dostoevsky's Work by Georg Lukacs

"These works have become even more topical and more fresh as time goes on."

(Read Full Article : Dostoevsky by Georg Lukacs 1949 at: https://www.marxists.org/archive/lukacs/works/1949/dostoyevsky.htm)

Chekhov made a definitive statement about this whole matter when he drew a sharp distinction between “the solution of a question and the correct putting of the question. Only the last is required of the artist." In Anna Karenina and Onegin not a single question is solved yet these works satisfy us fully only because all questions are put in them correctly.”

This insight is particularly important for a judgment of Dostoevsky for many – even most – of his political and social answers are false, have nothing to do with present-day reality or with the striving of the best today. They were obsolete, even reactionary, when they were pronounced.

Still, Dostoevsky is a writer of world eminence. For he knew how during a crisis of his country and the whole human race, to put questions in an imaginatively decisive sense. He created men whose destiny and inner life, whose conflicts and interrelations with other characters, whose attraction and rejection of men and ideas illuminated all the deepest questions of that age, sooner, more deeply, and more widely than in average life itself. This imaginative anticipation of the spiritual and moral development of the civilized world assured the powerful and lasting effect of Dostoevsky’s works. These works have become even more topical and more fresh as time goes on.

The experiment with oneself, the execution of an action not so much for the sake of the contents and effects of the action, but in order to know oneself once for all, in depth, to the very bottom, is one of the main human problems of the bourgeois and intellectual world of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

Only when this individualism turns inward – when it fails to find an Archimedean point either in current social aims or in the spontaneous urge of an egotistical ambition – does the problem of Dostoevsky’s experiments arise.

All these cases, however diverse, have something important in common. First of all, they are without exception the actions of lonely men – men who are completely dependent on themselves as they understand life and their environment, who live so deeply and intensely in themselves that the soul of others remains to them forever an unknown country. The other man is to them only a strange and menacing power which either subjugates them or becomes subject to them. . . Isolation, separation, loneliness reduces the relations among men to a struggle for superiority or inferiority. The experiment is a sublimated spiritual form, a psychological turning inward of naked struggles for power.

But by this solitude, by this immersion of the subject in itself, the self becomes bottomless. There arises either the anarchy of Stavrogin, a loss of direction in all instincts, or the obsession of a Raskolnikov by an “idea.” A feeling, an aim, an ideal acquires absolute sovereignty over the soul of a man: I, you, all men disappear, turn into shadows, exist only subsumed under the “idea.”

Reading Anton Makarenko’s writing on Education and Family

While reading articles of Makarenko on education and upbringing of the children, many memories of people from our relatives, our friends and our own family strike on our conscious. Our own childhood come before our thoughts, and we try to find out how un-consciously a number of children are brought up and educated in our society where we had grown up, where we see so many crimes happening from inside the family to outside the society, where so many self-centric “educated” people are roaming around the streets and at elite workplaces in hunt for satisfying their ego. In such dangerous times it is an excellent article for every person who wants to understand the purpose of education, and also for all of us who try to give our attention to the education of whole society. This article will open a whole new window for our conscious understanding about the facts why so many children we have seen in our neighborhood, or at our relatives, who were not brought up as expected by their parents and family members.

Hindi Translation of the Book is available at Link: एक पुस्तक माता-पिता के लिए

There are total eight lectures available online on the below link. Here is the first article.

(All the highlights in the below article are done by readers.)

GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR BRINGING UP A FAMILY, 1951

By Makarenko

(Read more writings at: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/makarenko/works/lectures/index.html)

---

The most important part of our lives is bringing up our children. They are the future citizens of our country and of the world. They will create history! Our children are the future fathers and mothers who will, in their turn, rear children. They must grow up to be good citizens and good fathers and mothers.

And this is not all -- our children are our old age -- if they are well brought up we will have a happy old age but if they are badly reared we will experience sorrow and tears. We will suffer before other people and before our country for our guilt.

Dear parents, above all remember the great importance of this matter of child-rearing and your responsibility for it...

Now let us turn our attention to some questions of general significance. First: to bring up a child correctly and normally is much easier than to re-educate him. It is really not as hard as some people seem to think. Any parent is capable of bringing up his children rightly -- if he really wants to. And what a joyful, pleasant, happy task it is! Re-education is a different matter. If you have done a bad job, been thoughtless, lazy or neglectful, much will have to be done over again, corrected. And this task requires more wisdom and patience than we find in every parent. So again, we advise you, parents, do your task well from the very beginning....

Parents must remember too, that in the pre-revolutionary family the father had great power; children lived completely under his will, there was no escape for them from parental authority and some fathers treated their children cruelly. In. our family the organization is very different. Our daughters do not have to wait for their fathers to find them a husband!

The feelings of the children rule. Obviously, if parents are to have influence now, they must find new methods, the old ones may no longer be used.

In the old-type family everyone belonged to some class and the son of a peasant was a peasant too, the son of a worker, a worker. Now a broad range of choice opens before our children. Their decisions need not be made according to the economic situation of the family but on the basis of their own capabilities and preparation. Both parents and children understand this. Under such conditions, parental decrees (फरमान) are impossible. Guiding must be done by wiser, more subtle and cautious means.

Our family is no longer a paternal one. Our women enjoy the same rights as men, mothers have rights equal with fathers. The Soviet family is a collective, not a group under one-man rule. Yet in this collective the parents have certain recognized rights. From whence do they derive them?

Now we do not deceive (झूठ बोलना) children. Although a family is a collective of equal members of society, children and parents differ from one another. Parents guide the family; the children are being brought up in it.

Parents must clearly understand that they are not the sole, uncontrolled bosses but must act as the older, responsible members of a collective. A clear concept of this will be very helpful in the task of bringing up children....

The structure of a family is important. This is, in the main, within our control. Even if a family has material problems, it should not limit itself to one child. An only child becomes the center of attention and receives more care than is normal or beneficial.... Often an only child becomes a real despot -- parents find that they have brought up an egoist whether they wanted to or not.

A large, well-organized family accustoms the children from infancy to mutual relationships, gives them opportunities to experience love and friendship in various forms between older and younger children. In such a family, children learn that necessary tasks cannot be carried out alone but must be done together. They experience life in a collective at every step, in play and work. This is essential for Soviet children. In bourgeois society it was less important because that society was constructed on egoistic principles...

Incomplete families, where the parents have separated, have an unhealthy influence on children's bringing up. The children may become the subject of dispute between parents who detest one another and do not hide this from their children. We advise parents who, for some reason, decide to separate to think first of all about the children, to hide their hatred and resolve conflicts tactfully. Parents who truly love their children will try to prevent their mutual differences from reaching a complete break so that their children will not be placed in this difficult situation. Obviously, if the father has left his family he cannot bring up his children. If his influence is bad, better forget him. That is the honest way to do. Of course, he must continue as before to carry his material responsibilities for the care of the children.....

Our next question is the matter of goals.

Some families never think about this. Parents just live beside their children and hope that things will take care of themselves. They have no goals, noprogram. Results, under such conditions, will be casual, haphazard. Parents are often surprised to find that their children have grown up badly... No one can do a job well unless he knows what he wants to accomplish. You must clearly understand your own desires. Do you want to bring up a true Soviet citizen, an energetic, honest, learned human being, one devoted to his country, to the revolution, work-loving, kind and courteous? Or do you want your child to be narrow-minded, greedy, cowardly, some kind of crafty little business man? Think this over carefully... Then you will see what mistakes you are making and what is the best path to follow.

Remember! You did not bring your son or daughter into the world for your own pleasure alone! And always remember that a future citizen is in your charge. If you fail, the grief will not be yours alone. The whole country will suffer. And do not brush this aside! Do not consider this a tiresome argument! If your factory turned out damaged goods you would be ashamed. Isn't it much more shameful for you to give your country a spoiled or bad human being?

Family affairs cannot be separated from the affairs of society. Your activities at home or at work are reflected in your family. They should see you as a politically, civic-minded person and not separate this image from their image of you as parent. Whatever happens in our country will reach them through your feelings and thoughts. They should know what makes you happy or sad, what is going on at your plant, what kind of community activity you are involved in. They should be proud of your successes and your service to society. This will not be healthy pride, however, if it is only pride in your good clothes, your automobile or your hunting rifle.

Your own conduct is decisive. You are constantly educating your child-- even when you are not with him. Your manner of dress, how you treat your friends or enemies, even what you laugh at -- read in the paper -- all this has great meaning for the child. You may not even be aware that your thoughts are affecting him in unseen ways -- a change in your voice...

If you are coarse or boastful (अशिष्टघमंडी) at home or -- much worse -- if you are insulting to mother, there is no use thinking about bringing up your children. You are already bringing them up badly and no advice will help you.

The parent's own self-discipline -- control at every step -- this is the most important method of bringing up children correctly.

We often meet parents who believe that some sort of clever prescription exists for bringing up children and that they must find it. In their opinion, if they find this prescription they may bring up work-loving people, honest citizens. If only they can get it into their hands they will be able to work miracles and their child will grow up rightly.

There are no such miracles. No prescription will help if the personality of the person rearing the child has great faults. First pay attention to these faults.

There are no pedagogic tricks. Unfortunately, some people believe in them. One thinks up punishments, another some kind of prize, a third plays the clown at home to amuse the children, a fourth bribe with promises.

Bringing up children requires a serious, simple and sincere attitude. -- Laziness, cynicism, frivolity will doom your work to failure. -- Tricks prevent parents from seeing the real tasks, confuse them and waste time.

And how many parents love to complain about lack of time! Of course it is a good thing to be with your children. It would be too bad if you did not see them often. But this does not mean that parents should never take their eyes off the children. This sort of thing develops passivity, accustoms children too much to adult society, may result in precocity. (Parents like to brag about precocity but later they find that they were wrong to do so.)

Of course a parent should know what his child is doing, where he is. But the child must have freedom so that he will be subject to a variety of influences. Don't think that he can be fenced off even from harmful or negative ones. For, in life, he will meet temptations, strange and evil people and circumstances. A hothouse upbringing will never develop the ability to withstand them and to struggle against them. ---

Children must have help and direction from time to time.. but this does not mean that they should be led by the hand... So for bringing up your child it is not more time that you need but correct use of the little time you have.

The essence of child rearing does not....consist in your conversations with the child, in direct effect on him, but rather in the organization of the family, of your own life and the life of the child. In this matter there are no trifles... Good organization consists in not brushing aside small details...These details of life act as an influence regularly, daily, hourly... To guide and organize life is your responsible task.

In summary:

Try to bring up your child correctly so that you will not have to re-educate him, which is much harder.

Remember that you are leading a new Soviet family. As far as possible achieve the right structure of the family.

Set yourself a goal and program for the task of up-bringing.

Remember that the child is not only your joy but a future citizen and that you answer to the country for him. Above all a good citizen yourself and carry your civic feeling family.

Make severe demands on your own behaviour.

No need of hunting for tricks and formulas. Be serious, simple and sincere. Guide the child but do not protect him from life.

The main thing in the work of bringing up children is the organization of family life with careful attention to details.

क्रान्तियों के बारे मे दोब्रूयोलोव और लेनिन के दो उद्धरण

"परिस्थितियां समाज में एक आवश्यकता को जन्म देती हैं। इस आवश्यकता को सब स्वीकार करते हैं, इस आवश्यकता की आम स्वीकृति के बाद यह जरूरी है कि वस्तुस्थिति में परिवर्तिन हो...।....चिन्तन मनन और वाद-विवाद के बाद क्रियाशीलता की श्रीगणेश होना चाहिये।... वर्षों से हमारे समाज ने क्या किया है? अब तक - कुछ नहीं।  उसने मनन-अध्ययन किया, विकसित हुआ, प्रवचनो को सुना, अपने विश्वासों के लिए संघर्ष के दौर में लगे आघातों पर सहानुभूति प्रकट की, कार्यक्षेत्र मे उतरने की तैयारी की, किन्तु किया कुछ नहीं! ढेर की ढेर सुन्दर भावनाओं-कल्पनाओं से लोगों के हृदय मस्तिष्क पट गए, समाज की वर्तमान व्यवस्था के बेतुकेपन और बेहूदगी का इतना पर्दाफाश किया गया कि पर्दाफाश करने के लिए कुछ रह ही नहीं गया। प्रतिवर्ष विशिष्ट, अपने-आप को 'चारों ओर की वास्तविकता से ऊंचा समझनेवाले', लोगों की संख्या बढ़ने लगी। ऐसा लगता था कि सीघ्र ही सब लोग वास्तविकता से ऊँचे उठ जायेंगे।...हमें ऐसे लोगों की आवश्यकता नहीं है।... हमें ऐसे लोगो की आवश्यकता है जो स्वयं हमें वास्तविकता को ऊंचा उठाना सिखायें, ताकि हम उसे उन संगत मानकों के स्तर पर ला सकें जिन्हें सब मानते और स्वीकार करते हैं।" 

- दोब्रूयोलोव (साहित्यिक आलोचक)

 

"जब 'निचले वर्ग' पुराने तरीको को मानने से इनकार कर देते हैं, और 'ऊपरी-वर्ग' पुराने तरीके बनाए रखने में असफल हो जाते हैं -सिर्फ तभी क्रांतियों की जीत होती है।" . . . "क्रांतियां मेहनतकश और शोषित जनता द्वारा राजनीतिक संघर्ष में भाग लेने वालों की संख्या का दस गुना, यहां तक कि सौ गुना तीव्रता से विकसित होने का परिणाम होती हैं।" 

- लेनिन (रूसी क्रांतिकारी)