English, asked by rishika12385, 4 months ago

Q.5. Why did Toto fail to make its room in the private zoo of another's grandfather? Q.6. How did the guru and the disciple differ on staying in the kingdom of fools ? How did the circumstances prove the wisdom of the guru ?

Answers

Answered by gurmanpreet1023
2

Answer:

The guru tries to confuse the king by expressing his desire to be killed first. He told the king that it was not an ordinary stake. It was the stake of the god of justice. It was new that never had a criminal on it.  So, whoever would die on the stake first would become the king in next life and the second to die would become his minister. The king wanted to avail himself of the opportunity as he didn’t want to lose the kingdom to someone else in the next round of life. So he ordered to postpone the execution to the next day and talked in secret with his minister. That night, the king and his minister went secretly to the prison. They released the guru and the disciple and disguised themselves as the two. Finally, both of them were taken to the stake and promptly executed. In this way the Guru managed to save his disciple’s life.

Answered by parvejansari13550
6

Answer:

5)It was nearing six o'clock in the evening (Periodic change). The sun was setting (Periodic change). A breeze was blowing (Natural change). Leaves on the tree were shaking (Physical change). Sahil was sitting in the courtyard, rolling balls of wet soil and shaping them into various toys (Physical change). Then he felt hungry (Chemical change) and went into the house. Mother made a dough from wheat flour and fried purees (Irreversible change). While eating hot purees, his attention was drawn outside the window. It had started raining (Natural change). There was lightning (Natural change), too. Sahil was enjoying his dinner in the dim light.

6)Inspite of the child's act, her parents can successfully sue the University for damages.

SOLUTION

The university is under an obligation to take reasonable care to prevent injury which a reasonable person would foresee. The injury caused to the child in the given case is foreseeable and not remote. Thus the university would be held liable.

Similar questions