'Am among followers of non-violence': PM Modi reacts as ‘Jo humein chhedega' remark draws loud applause at Jain event
NEW DELHI: Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Saturday stirred excitement during a spiritual event by briefly referring to
while recalling the remarks of a Jain seer who had spoken before him.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
The mention, though indirect, drew a wave of cheers and applause from the audience at Vigyan Bhawan.
The loudest response came when
invoked the phrase "Jo humein chhedega", that instantly resonated with the audience, which broke into 'Modi Modi' chants.
Reacting to it, PM Modi smiled and said, 'I am among followers of non-violence... and I had only said half the sentence... but you completed it... what I mean to say is, even if you did not say it in words, you were giving your blessings to Operation Sindoor.
(Ahinsawadiyo ke beech hu.. aur abhi toh aadha vaakya bola hu.. aur aapne poora kar diya.. kehne ka tatparya yeh hai... bhale aapne shabdon mein nahi kaha par aap Operation Sindoor ko aashirwad de rahe the).
"
'Jo Hume Chhedega…': PM Modi's Speech on Operation Sindoor Cut Short by Audience. Here's Why
PM Modi made these remarks during the centenary celebrations of Acharya Vidyanand Maharaj Ji, a revered Jain spiritual leader and scholar, whose teachings and legacy the prime minister hailed extensively. The event was organised by the ministry of culture in collaboration with the Bhagwan Mahaveer Ahimsa Bharti Trust, Delhi.
The prime minister lauded the ancient and enduring values of Indian civilisation, crediting saints and seers for shaping the country's identity. 'Our India is the oldest living civilisation in the world, we are immortal for thousands of years, because our thoughts are immortal, our thinking is immortal, our philosophy is immortal,' he said.
Referring to Acharya Vidyanand Maharaj Ji as a "Yug Purush" and "Yug Drashta", Modi praised his contribution to Jain philosophy, revival of the Prakrit language, and social reform.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
He noted the Acharya's deep knowledge and literary legacy, including over 50 authored works, and his role in restoring ancient temples.
PM Modi also highlighted how his government drew inspiration from such spiritual figures for its welfare policies. 'Whether it is PM Awas Yojana, Jal Jivan Mission,
... they signify the sense of service towards the last person in the social hierarchy,' he said.
He reiterated the government's efforts to promote mother tongues, especially Prakrit, which was accorded Classical Language status in October last year.
'In our mission to digitise ancient manuscripts, a large section of it includes Jain religious texts and manuscripts associated with acharyas,' he added.
Union culture minister Gajendra Singh Shekhawat and Jain seer Rashtrasant Paramparacharya Shri 108 Pragyasagar ji Muniraj also attended the event. The centenary year, spanning June 28 to April 22, 2026, will include cultural, literary, and spiritual programmes across India.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
20 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
The Bomb That wasn't: How South Asia Lost Its Chance at Peace
History is shaped not just by what happened, but also by what didn't. In the early 1980s, India was ready for a pre-emptive strike on its sworn enemy that would have rewritten the future of South Asia. The plan was bold. Israeli jets would take off from Jamnagar airbase, refuel midair, and obliterate Pakistan's Kahuta nuclear facility—then still vulnerable. Operation Bonsai, as the Israelis reportedly codenamed it, had support in the highest quarters of Indian intelligence. But it was vetoed by Indira Gandhi—twice. Once in 1982. Again in 1984. Why? Washington's arrogance. Pakistan was its Cold War ally. The same Washington that now sermonises India about non-proliferation while running covert operations from Tel Aviv to Tehran. That selfsame empire sent veiled warnings of 'consequences' if India dared cross the line. And so Indira blinked. The rest is nuclear fallout. Now imagine a counter-history. Had the Kahuta facility been flattened before it reached criticality, Pakistan's nuclear deterrent would never have existed. No mushroom cloud diplomacy, no doctrine of 'plausible deniability' through nuclear cover that emboldened the Pakistani deep state to launch asymmetric warfare. Kargil might never have happened. The 2001 Indian Parliament attack could have met with full-spectrum retaliation. The 26/11 Mumbai massacre might not have been followed by a strategic shrug and a surgical strike for optics. More importantly, Pakistan would have been forced to behave like a conventional state, not a jihadist startup with nukes. Instead what has Islamabad done since going nuclear? Hosted Osama bin Laden under the nose of its military in Abbottabad. Launched Kargil under the nuclear umbrella.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
The emerging divide in US-Japan relations
The US–Japan alliance is considered the most enduring partnership in the Indo-Pacific. However, recent developments indicate a growing unevenness in this crucial bilateral relationship. Once a predictable and resilient alliance now appears misaligned, particularly in expectations surrounding defence spending, diplomatic access, and international crises. Japan's anxieties resurfaced with the return of a Donald Trump administration, although initial gestures offered reassurance. Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, despite not having a prior personal relationship with Donald Trump, was among the first world leaders invited to the White House. This early outreach mirrored the treatment of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. By contrast, the Australian Prime Minister was kept waiting and, even after re-election, has yet to be hosted in Washington. For Japan, this suggested that they might successfully recalibrate ties with Washington. Growing inconsistencies in US demands and Japan's limited diplomatic access to key American officials are causing unease in Tokyo, particularly given the Ishiba administration's relative inexperience. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD There are three clear signs of emerging strain. First, the US appears to be making broad demands on its allies in Europe and Asia regarding defence spending. The recently concluded NATO Summit in The Hague focused almost exclusively on persuading member states to raise defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP. While this was directed at NATO members, similar expectations are now surfacing in US dealings with Indo-Pacific partners like Japan, Korea and Australia. In fact, Japan's Prime Minister Ishiba declined an invitation to attend the NATO summit, despite a recent tradition of Japanese PMs participating in the post-Ukraine context. This absence was interpreted as a deliberate signal that Tokyo does not wish to be drawn into the same defence-spending framework that NATO members have accepted. Japanese officials have reportedly encountered mixed messaging from Washington. On one hand, Japan is being informally asked to raise its defence spending to 3 per cent of GDP, a significant increase from its current level of 1.8 per cent, with a planned rise to 2 per cent by 2027. On the other hand, US interlocutors are framing this expectation as a part of trade negotiations, linking it to tariff reductions. This dual messaging is complicating Japan's internal policy environment. Tokyo wants such increases to be seen as sovereign decisions, not concessions made under US pressure, particularly with Upper House elections looming in July. Ishiba is wary of appearing weak or reactive in the face of American demands. A second sign of strain lies in the way US officials are extending NATO-style expectations to Indo-Pacific allies. During the Shangri-La Dialogue, US defence officials suggested that Australia should aim for 3.5 per cent of GDP in defence spending. The same figure is now increasingly being floated in Washington's dealings with Tokyo. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This recalibration appears to stem from people like Elbridge Colby, Under Secretary of Defence for Policy. Japanese officials reportedly find it difficult to engage with Colby's office, which they view as pushing unrealistic and uncoordinated demands. Complicating matters, is confusion in Tokyo about whether the 5 per cent NATO target applies to Indo-Pacific allies, 3.5 per cent for defence and 1.5 per cent for infrastructure resilience, which Japan may find more manageable than significantly raising direct defence outlays. The NATO-IndoPacific4 communique is unclear on this. The US justifies these expectations by framing them in the context of preparing for a possible Taiwan crisis, which Washington believes could be triggered by China by 2027. However, the abruptness and unilateral nature of these expectations are generating friction rather than fostering alignment. Japan feels cornered by demands that neither respect its political sensitivities nor offer strategic clarity. Reflecting this discontent, Tokyo has postponed the US–Japan '2+2' ministerial meeting between their foreign and defence ministers, originally scheduled to coincide with the upcoming Quad Foreign Ministers' Meeting in July beginning. While Japan remains committed to participating in the Quad event, it has declined to hold the bilateral dialogue at this time. Tokyo insists it prefers to wait until after the July 20 Upper House elections, when Ishiba hopes for a stronger domestic mandate. Observers in both countries doubt this will significantly alter Washington's expectations or attitude. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Another manifestation of unevenness lies in Japan's cautious stance on US military actions. Japan has not explicitly supported the US attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, despite its alliance obligations. Ishiba remarked, 'It is difficult for Japan to make a definitive legal evaluation at this point.' Japan agrees that Iran must be prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons but is reluctant to condone an action lacking United Nations authorisation. For a country that places strong emphasis on international law, Japan fears that overt support for legally questionable military strikes could set dangerous precedents. This is especially relevant given the risk of China or North Korea engaging in similar actions in Japan's neighbourhood. Japan's current reticence is different from its past behaviour. In 2017, when the US struck Syria in response to chemical weapons use, then Prime Minister Shinzo Abe expressed understanding, albeit without giving outright support. In 2019, following attacks on oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, the US asked allies to join a naval coalition. Japan delayed participation for months and eventually sent its Self-Defence Forces independently, avoiding association with the US-led effort. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Japan's nuanced diplomacy reflects its effort to balance alliance solidarity with its national legal and economic considerations, particularly its better relations with Iran and its dependence on stable energy imports. The inconclusive Trump-Ishiba meeting on the sidelines of the G7 taught Japan that doing more on defence is not getting it leeway on trade tariffs. Strategic Mistrust Growing? In sum, the emerging unevenness in US–Japan relations stems from several sources: inconsistent and opaque US demands, lack of diplomatic access to key American policymakers, pressure to commit to steep defence increases, and divergent interpretations of international law. These issues are further exacerbated by a sense in Tokyo that Washington's strategic messaging lacks coordination and is poorly timed with Japan's domestic political calendar. The Ishiba administration appears intent on managing the alliance with caution and asserting Japan's strategic autonomy where possible. Yet the reality remains that alliance management under Trump 2.0 is proving more complicated than anticipated. Japan may be unwilling to say 'no', but it is increasingly finding ways to say 'not yet'. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD As regional instability intensifies and Washington raises the stakes in its strategic competition with China, how the US and Japan recalibrate their expectations of each other may well determine the future balance of power in the Indo-Pacific. The author is a former ambassador to Germany, Indonesia, Ethiopia, ASEAN and the African Union. He tweets @AmbGurjitSingh. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Zohran Mamdani, Trump's 'worst nightmare', may really be a gift to him
FOUR DAYS before New York City's Democratic mayoral primary Zohran Mamdani, a 33-year-old democratic socialist assemblyman who represents part of Queens, walked the length of Manhattan, 13 miles (21km) from Inwood Hill Park to the Staten Island Ferry terminal. 'New Yorkers deserve a mayor that they can see, they can hear, they can even yell at,' he said. It was reminiscent of Ed Koch, a charismatic mayor in the 1970s and 1980s. Koch would often ask his constituents: 'How'm I doin'?' He was greeted by cheers or jeers, depending on the year and the neighbourhood. By that standard, Mr Mamdani, who beat the Democratic establishment to win the primary on June 24th, already looks mayoral. PREMIUM Supporters and pundits agree that Zohran Mamdani's campaign has demonstrated social media savvy and authenticity.(AP) Just a few months ago few people outside the district he represents in the state legislature had heard of him. He polled less than 1% when he entered the race in October. Yet he defeated Andrew Cuomo, New York's former governor, who was once one of the biggest names in American politics. Mr Mamdani's unexpected victory delighted progressives and, for different reasons, Republicans. It is in part a rejection of Mr Cuomo, who resigned because of allegations of sexual harassment and of undercounting the number of New Yorkers who died in care homes during the covid-19 pandemic (he denies wrongdoing). But it also represents something bigger: it is a rejection of Democratic centrism and politics as usual. Democratic-primary voters tend to be more left-wing than the party's average voter. They were not impressed by the endorsement that Mr Cuomo received from Bill Clinton, a former president, and turned off by one from Bill Ackman, a billionaire hedge-fund manager. Mr Mamdani is an immigrant, which may have helped in a city where 40% of the residents are foreign-born. He was born in Kampala, Uganda. After early years in post-apartheid South Africa his family settled in America when he was seven. He became an American citizen in 2018. He grew up in the shadow of Columbia University, where his father, Mahmood Mamdani, a Ugandan-born expert on colonialism, taught. Mr Mamdani told the New York Times that he had a privileged upbringing. But he also understands what it means to be stateless: his father was expelled from Uganda for several years because of his Indian ethnicity. His mother, Mira Nair, is an Indian Oscar-nominated film-maker known for stories about identity and diaspora. Both of Mr Mamdani's parents have been outspoken critics of Israel's war in Gaza. Mr Mamdani has also criticised Israel's policies. As a student at Bowdoin College, a small liberal-arts school, he co-founded a pro-Palestine group. More recently, he failed to condemn the phrase 'globalise the intifada', which many Jewish people consider to be a call for violence against them. He said on a podcast that the phrase is not a call for violence, but an expression of the desire for Palestinian 'equality and human rights'. Baloney, say many Jewish New Yorkers. Before he entered politics, Mr Mamdani dipped his toe into hip-hop, as a rapper by the name of 'Mr Cardamom'. He was not successful. He was also a foreclosure-prevention counsellor, helping people from minority backgrounds in Queens stay in their homes. He entered politics in 2020, when he became the first South Asian elected to the New York State assembly; since then only three of his bills have become law. He recently married an artist. Unabashedly left-wing, Mr Mamdani belongs to the Democratic Socialists of America, an activist group that believes 'working people' should run things 'to meet human needs, not to make profits for a few'. His campaign theme was affordability. Mr Mamdani wants to make buses free, to freeze rent, to open city-run supermarkets in 'food deserts' and to hit the rich with higher taxes. This scares the living daylights out of many well-heeled New Yorkers. Left-wing he may be, but likeably so. 'I actually don't think Mr. Mamdani's success is primarily about his ideology. It's about his talent as a new media-savvy politician,' says Jesse Arm of the Manhattan Institute, a think-tank. 'He's run a really smart messaging campaign.' His social-media posts were positive and down-to-earth. Whereas Mr Cuomo's campaign events were rare and orchestrated. Some 46,000 people campaigned for Mr Mamdani. He attracted young voters and moderate ones. He rewrote the city's political map, winning many of the districts that Donald Trump won in the 2024 presidential election. Areas that seem unpromising for a candidate of his ilk, like Hillside in Queens and Tottenville on Staten Island, voted for him. Mr Mamdani calls himself 'Donald Trump's worst nightmare—as a progressive, Muslim immigrant.' He's the sort of refreshing politician that Democrats have been looking for as an answer to the Visigothic vim of the MAGA movement. But Republicans may be as delighted by his victory as progressives are. Elise Stefanik, who represents part of upstate New York in Congress, told CNN that Mr Mamdani is 'the single most effective foil for Republicans nationally'. After the primary Mr Trump posted on social media that Mr Mamdani is 'a 100% Communist Lunatic'. His Republican rival in the mayoral election in November will be Curtis Sliwa, founder of the Guardian Angels, who patrolled the subways in red berets starting in the crime-ridden 1970s, and an unsuccessful mayoral candidate in 2021. Perhaps a bigger obstacle to Mr Mamdani's mayoralty is Eric Adams, the incumbent. The Department of Justice indicted him for corruption (then dropped the case on Mr Trump's orders) and he lost the Democratic Party's nomination. He plans to run as an independent. Mr Cuomo is staying in the race, too, at least for now, as an independent. If Mr Mamdani is elected, he would be the first Muslim mayor in New York City's history. He would also be the youngest, and the first immigrant in decades. More important, he will be the first political star of the left to emerge during Mr Trump's second presidency. What is not yet clear is whether Democrats of his kind will lead the party out of the wilderness or deeper into it.
