Brainwaves
   
Human brain is made up of billions of brain cells called neurons, which use electricity to communicate with each other. The combination of millions of neurons sending signals at once produces an enormous amount of electrical activity in the brain, which can be detected using sensitive medical equipment (such as an EEG), measuring electricity levels over areas of the scalp. The combination of electrical activity of the brain is commonly called a Brainwave pattern, because of its cyclic, 'wave-like' nature. Our mind regulates its activities by means of electric waves which are registered in the brain, emiting tiny electrochemical impulses of varied frequencies, which can be registered by an electroencephalogram. These brainwaves are known as:  
Beta, Alpha,Theta & Delta
1.
Beta emited when we are consciously alert, or we feel agitated, tense, afraid, with frequencies ranging from 13 to 60 pulses per second in the Hertz scale. 


2.
Alpha when we are in a state of physical and mental relaxation, although aware of what is happening around us, its frequency are around 7 to 13 pulses per second.


3.
Theta more or less 4 to 7 pulses, it is a state of somnolence with reduced consciousness.


4.
Delta when there is unconsciousness, deep sleep or catalepsy, emitting between 0.1 and 4 cycles per second. 


In general, we are accostumed to using the beta brain rythm. When we diminish the brain rythm to alpha, we put ourselves in the ideal condition to learn new information, keep fact, data, perform elaborate tasks, learn languages, analyse complex situations. Meditation, relaxation exercises, and activities that enable the sense of calm, also enable this alpha state. According to neuroscientists, analysing electroencephalograms of people submmited to tests in order to research the effect of decreasing the brain rythm, the attentive relaxation or the deep relaxation, produce signficant increases in the levels of beta-endorphin, noroepinephrine and dopamine, linked to feelings of enlarged mental clarity and formation of rememberances, and that this effect lasts for hours and even days. It is an ideal state for synthetic thought and creativity, the proper functions of the right hemisphere. As it is easy for the hemisphere to create images, to visualise, to make associations, to deal with drawings, diagrams and emotions, as well as the use of good-humour and pleasure, learning is better absorbed if these elements are added to the study methods. 

Not just quite a few, I believe most, of our ordeals are those which two segments of the State mutely contribute. These two are, judiciary and the fourth state, the media.
Their tacit role escape attention. In this regard, media has twin role as a major participant in the creation of public miseries. First one is a natural outcome of incompetence. Take any news story. Its content would speak for the incompetence of the scribe to address the issue covered therein. Second one is media's near non-concern about the judicial machinery. The legal proceedings , which may extend or touch upon the non-exercise or abuse of statutory functions of the police, are out of the bound areas for the media that is marred by perceptional inadequacies for want of expertise or expert guidance.
The shortcomings in the media has direct bearing on the sluggish pace at which the justice delivery system functions. Those who know little but pretend to be all knowing, in which art we have excelled in recent years, entertain a misconception that the tardy pace of the Indian legal apparatus is something natural as being an inevitable product of dilatory character of the laws. This misconception subsists primarily because of the fact that the media has relegated the justice delivery system to a dark region from which a respectable distance must be maintained, lest a misadventure might land an enthusiast into trouble . To explain the situation, one may visualise the reaction of a novice who is asked to climb an electric pole to remedy an electrical fault responsible for power tripping. What is needed is to find a right person who is an adept rather than hearing the dangers involved in the requisite act. Media has not been able to find a set of adepts who would address legal reportings and have chosen to abandon the field, maintaing only cosmetic presence.
In the result, the judicial system has , over a period of time, receded beyond public view. Why only public view? Even its controlling functionaries might be wholly unaware of its underlying deficiencies which are getting worse with each passing day.

(More to follow)

Watching Zee TV. It is covering Lee Kaun Yew and is repeatedly flashing, 'India should take lesson'. One may generally agree, but I slightly disagree. Learning is not our cup of tea. We have learnt enough. We are proud of our philosophical heritage. We already have our father of the nation, who is a complete doctrine in itself. Isn't it? All these may be understatement. Many may have many more lines to add, leaving no scope for subtraction. And that is why, learning and taking lesson would not pass feasibility test when it is India and when it is about illustrious Indians.

It's my sincere feeling that we need some one to tell us convincingly that we need purging. What we need is not learning. Some one should teach us the art of 'unlearning'. Evacuating all those rubbish and garbage that Indians have consigned to their psyche, using it as a dumping ground. 

NOMOCRACY (Rule of law).

I have been prompted by Dipak, Dr. Dipak Kumar Lal, a non-resident Indian, now in Britain, to address the illusion most intellectuals here and in abroad, harbour, about the Indian justice delivery system and its efficacy, accessibility, etc. 
To avoid getting entrapped in any slip shod aberration, I prefer to dwell at length on the subject, in such bits and pieces as may be easily digestible. Going whole hog may cause repugnance, as the illusory impressions so covetedly stored in general perception are going to be seriously offended by means of objective reasoning.

Governance, based on the rule of law, rather than arbitrary will, terror, etc., is technically called NOMOCRACY.

What is its antonym? There is no need to waste time in searching or researching the antonym of nomocracy. We, in India, especially in backward state like Bihar , are familiar with a collequal term, close to what we are searching. Mobocracy . Ever heard? An Indian living in India would chuckle and say this term is not new, but those staying shores away might goggle at the term in an attempt to decipher what it means.  Soon this term should find place in English Dictionaries. Especially in the Indian context.

Common man's ordeals  owe imensely to the conflict that result from the hypocrisy which our systems maintain to hide its progressive collapse. Which segment of the state is a major contributor to the increasing dwarfing of the rule of law by its unruly counterpart?  Legislature? Executive? Or Judiciary?

Those who have the inside view and access to the system would take no time to figure out who, how and wherefore. But this is not for public sharing, as its substantiation is not efficacious. All the same, an unsubstantiated inference would merit rejection, worthy of being labelled as a wild outpouring.

As such, a team of law students dedicated their research but were in grief while adjudging their own stream, the legal system, as the major contributor , in the promotion of mobocracy ; and in the simultaneous supplanting of what is 'nomocracy', the concept of the rule of law.

DEFINATION
In its general sense, the phrase  Nomocracy , can be traced back to the 16th century, and it was popularized in the 19th century by British jurist A. V. Dicey. The concept was familiar to ancient philosophers such as Aristotle, who wrote "Law should govern".Rule of law implies that every citizen is subject to the law. It stands in contrast to the idea that the ruler is above the law, for example by divine right.
Despite wide use by politicians, judges and academics, the rule of law has been described as "an exceedingly elusive notion" giving rise to a "rampant divergence of understandings ... everyone is for it but have contrasting convictions about what it is."
At least two principal conceptions of the rule of law can be identified: a formalist or "thin" definition, and a substantive or "thick" definition. Formalist definitions of the rule of law do not make a judgment about the "justness" of law itself, but define specific procedural attributes that a legal framework must have in order to be in compliance with the rule of law. Substantive conceptions of the rule of law go beyond this and include certain substantive rights that are said to be based on, or derived from, the rule of law.


Rule according to law; rule under law; or rule according to a higher law.

The rule of law is an ambiguous term that can mean different things in different contexts. In one context the term means rule according to law. No individual can be ordered by the government to pay civil damages or suffer criminal punishment except in strict accordance with well-established and clearly defined laws and procedures. In a second context the term means rule under law. No branch of government is above the law, and no public official may act arbitrarily or unilaterally outside the law. In a third context the term means rule according to a higher law. No written law may be enforced by the government unless it conforms with certain unwritten, universal principles of fairness, morality, and justice that transcend human legal systems.

Rule According to Law

The rule of law requires the government to exercise its power in accordance with well-established and clearly written rules, regulations, and legal principles. A distinction is sometimes drawn between power, will, and force, on the one hand, and law, on the other. When a government official acts pursuant to an express provision of a written law, he acts within the rule of law. But when a government official acts without the imprimatur of any law, he or she does so by the sheer force of personal will and power.

Under the rule of law, no person may be prosecuted for an act that is not punishable by law. When the government seeks to punish someone for an offense that was not deemed criminal at the time it was committed, the rule of law is violated because the government exceeds its legal authority to punish. The rule of law requires that government impose liability only insofar as the law will allow. Government exceeds its authority when a person is held to answer for an act that was legally permissible at the outset but was retroactively made illegal. This principle is reflected by the prohibition against Ex Post Facto Laws in the U.S. Constitution.

For similar reasons, the rule of law is abridged when the government attempts to punish someone for violating a vague or poorly worded law in that ill-defined laws confer too much discretion upon government officials who are charged with the responsibility of prosecuting or persecuting individuals for wrongdoing, whether criminal or civil. Most prosecutorial or persecutional decisions are based on the personal discretion of a government official. Long list of pending writ applications with unending volumes of fresh inpurs would bear testimony to this.

In the above backdrop, the subsequent posts would raise the curtain as to what the justice delivery system, in its existing state, has been contributing to the promotion of mobocracy, at the cost and peril of nomocracy, i.e., rule of law.

बहुत दिया देने वाले ने तुझको आन्चल हि न समाये तो क्या किजे

(Kindly excuse spelling errors that may be the mischief of converters)

Any one, and more importantly when that one is no less a person than Dr. Dipak Kumar Lal, is free to admire as well as to condemn, as opinions are free whereas facts are sacred. 
Instead of just one liners, why not engage in data compilation. India can be evaluated, bearing its contemporary China in mind, as also Japan, Germany, Singapore, Korea and like instances.
It may be convenient to dismiss a view, by adjudging something admirable as disgusting. But when it comes to fact compilation, an opinion may collapse as a castle of cards must.
 I am not a social scientist, nor a political analyst, nor ........  , nor ............, nor ....... (One is free to fill in the blanks, to denigrate these writings to have emanated from a non-expert of non-experts, but I assert to be one which few would dare to vie with. I am that great entity of that small denomination , bearing the nomenclature, 'citizen of India' .
Statistics may show me in the wrong, but at the micro level, I have my own experience as a cultivator. The per acre yield of grain has trebled. Which means I have multiplied my income 2/3 fold. Sorry. I as a farmer has been duped, the nation might have gained if statistics would so justify.
Earlier, I grew traditional varieties of paddy, involving expenditure equal to or in terms of paddy. I would spend 1 mound of paddy and would harvest 14/16 mounds an acre, thereby netting a profit of 13-15 mounds an acre. All I needed was protection against the vagaries of nature, but even the rain-fed areas would endure erratic rains or even inundations caused by torrential showers. Now the position has changed. The high yielding varieties require high investment levels which raise the break even to a point where crop failure incite suicidal trends. What has made the nation self sufficient on grains has equally made the farmers losers in terms of value. I am unsure if there are comparative statistics of the fluctuating fortunes of the farmers of this self sufficient nation on grains.   
Now, again, the above lines are my opinion which statistics can disprove, but who or what can efface that fact of mine that Nehru was indeed great who made the Birlas taller than sky, by making us endure Fiats, Ambassadors and Standards, when the world, especially you enjoying the technological advancements of the west, was standing confused with a vast choice while we were paying premium for a fiat premier. 
If you excuse me for this unkind cut, I may ask you one stupid question. Do an action replay. You had suffered a near fatal infection. Visualise yourself lying in PMCH of which you are a proud product. And then say where you stand in such visualised action replay. You might conjure up a heaven for yourself, as  argument for argument sake is all permissive and all pervasive. But I ,for one, can not conjure up anything better than a veritable hell for which, i don't know, whom to thank, Gandhi? Who gifted a true Gandhian to the people of India in the shape of a Nehru; or an Indira who might justify all her actions as long as people of India had yet to give her massive mandate; or a Rajiv Gandhi who proved to be a block buster pilot that brought out a magnificent crash for India on nearly all fronts, paving way for the lesser mortals to grow all around the country in the form of Lalus, Mulayams, Mayawatis, Jailalitas, Mamtas, Nitishes, so on and so forth. 
Shall continue, in different genres though, detesting absence of sensitivity on the part of those who carry India's glories while leaving its ordeals to be shared by the victims of those very greats whom you, from a distance, take pride in revering mindlessly.

Reason out before you either admire or condemn. It is reason from which it must emerge, whether you have rightly condemned or have wrongly admired. Neither may seem justified, if reason is transparently reflected, bereft of prejudices.We are indeed poor at that. Why not  see our own deficiency, in foolishly admiring leaders under spell of emotion or condemning under spell of ire. A self analysis of one's own admirations and condemnations may reveal more of our own inadequacies than those of the admired or condemned political stuff, from Nehru down to Kejriwal.

Let me further try to dissect the term ,' Dharma' and find out its proximity and distinction with the term , 'law' as we understand this term in its imperative sense. Law in its imperative sense means the existence of a superior force that would compel obedience. Imperative law mandates train travel only on a rail ticket. Violate the mandate and reap the consequence. Likewise, one has to adhere to left hand driving. Take to right hand drive and reap the consequence. Law will chase. The reason why i have cited these examples is to deal with that confusion which an analogy respecting such examples may or must arise in a prudent mind. A questioning mind may shoot back a question, referring to only exceptional cases in our land where law really enforces itself. We have seen the law carrying begging bowl, beseeching compliance from the powerful and the mighty. All W.T passengers do not get consigned to jail or even subjected to fine. Breaking traffic rules too rarely invite the law to chase the offender. 

Therefore, by equating Dharma with law, a distinct dilution to its definition occurs, in that , in a confused state in which we mostly prefer to dwell, it is forgotten that in the above instance, the  law as a chaser does not seem faltering. What dilutes the chase factor of the legal system is not the enforceability and might of the law, but rather it is the failure or negligence of the enforcing agency. The failure and negligence subsists due to human lapses.

Now see. Is it possible for the enforcing agencies that nature employs to be failing or negligent in sparing your finger that is forced inside a burning flame. If analogies confuse, better try this, for an unequivocal answer. But ,for heavens sake, please don't try the other one, the drowning option, for we still need you, if not for other things, at least for your feed back.

Visit

www.rajeshsahai.blogspot.in