You know what’s the “real” Hobson’s Choice?
Having to choose between mother and wife is the real Hobson’s Choice.
Well I don’t know why they call it a “choice”. Because in its actuality, it really isn’t a choice. A choice is something where I can choose either of the two things without having to loose the other one. Theoretically speaking, this is not true. When you make a choice you either have to go with A or with B.
You can see many of married men (why many? Almost all of the married men who have mother) entangled in the mesh of Hobson’s Choice. A constant dilemma looms over their minds. Such a strong dilemma that their mind suddenly becomes unable to choose between two sides. If he chooses his mother’s side, nights would be very hard to pass by. On the other hand if he chooses his wife’s side, a guilt feeling makes home in the heart. He has to spend rest of his life with wife, hence taking her side makes sense. But at the same time, mother has done so many sacrifices for him that he feels mother’s words should be respected.
A wise man can manage to have a fine balance with him by strategically agreeing to both the sides, either at the same time or changing his party from time to time. But still there are certain moments when he too can’t defy the inevitable, and that’s when he is left with “Hobson’s Choice” only.
Written for Daily Prompt
This is in continuation of previous post – “Do things really change???”
Take an example of “Honeymoon”.
Honeymoon, since the historical times, was a tour of newly wed couple away from people to get to know each other well. There are references to ancient times, since which time it is considered to have come into play, which suggest that since 16th century English people started this tradition of Honeymooning. But even before that, Indian elites used to go for “Bridal Tour” with relatives and friends after marriage.
Honeymoon simply described the period after wedding which is considered to be sweet as honey. And this period wanes, fades away as Moon, in a period of a month or so – hence Honeymoon.
(Reference: Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honeymoon)
And consider 20th or 21st century’s example. Newlyweds still go to honeymoon, though the superficial aspects of honeymooning have changed (it’s different issue that these days couples go to exotic places to click snaps and upload them on Facebook). Honeymoon is still a way of knowing your partner mentally, physically well.
Well think this way, newlyweds don’t need to go to exotic places or get away from home to enjoy honeymoon. It can be enjoyed at the comforts of your home also. In old times going out could make sense, clutter of people around all the time, fewer rooms to have privacy – but with ample space, privacy and no clutter of people around, people still prefer to go to different place for honeymoon.
If we think of the reason it is quite simple, the newlywed people need space and privacy to discuss various things and get to know each other well. This is the underlying motive behind going out for honeymoon. It was there in old days and it is still the same.
Do things really change? Or our perceptions and methods do? Does underlying meaning or motive of the tradition change?
Indian mythology is full of miracles, supernatural and marvelous phenomenon, which cannot be justified with the common knowledge of Science. But every tale (not almost but every) has something or the other to teach us. The teachings mostly being about moral and ethics, what is righteous and what is wrong. In short how to behave as a human being. Indian mythology is overwhelmingly full of such tales and incidents.
One of such incident is of Sant Jñāneshwar.
Sant in Marathi means saint. He was a 13thCentury (1275-1296) saint, poet, philosopher and much more. His
contribution to Marathi literature and overall history of India is something inexplicable. He wrote a commentary and critic on Bhagvad Geeta, known as Bhavartha Deepika, at the tender age of 15. Today, that Bhavartha Deepika also known as Dnyaneshwari is considered a milestone in Literature World. He had one elder brother (Nivrutti – who was also his Guru/teacher) and 2 younger siblings (Sopan and Mukta).
Now he (Dnyaneshwar) being very pious, soft spoken, ever calm and composed, often did some or the other miracles like, asking a male buffalo to read out the Vedas loudly and cooking bread on his sister’s back etc. But the most talked about miracle is of he and his siblings sitting on a wall and making it fly.
The story may be true, may not be true. I, however, believe that the story is true. But keeping aside the practical part of it, we have a huge lesson to be learnt from this incidence. It often happens that we get into the fight of deciding whether it is correct or not and always keep aside what we need to learn from it.
Coming back to the story, there was another learned person and a saint himself named Changdeva Maharaj, who was a mystical yogi. He had control over the “Classical Elements” and used to perform supernatural acts with his this control.
It so happened, that Changdeva Maharaj came to know about Dnyaneshwar and his sibling’s prowess over Vedas and wanted to test them. So he sent a blank note/paper to Dnyaneshwar Maharaj. On receiving this blank paper, Dnyaneshwar Maharaj and his siblings started laughing at this gesture and wrote back a 65 verse quintessence on Vedas back to Changdeva Maharaj. Changdeva Maharaj, though being highly learned and so much powerful, couldn’t understand anything out of those 65 verses and decided to meet these children in person and show the greatness and power of his. So he rode a huge tiger and carried a venomous Cobra as a whip. Dnyaneshwar saw a big procession coming towards their village and spotted Changdeva Maharaj riding a tiger. These siblings then sat on a wall and made it fly towards Changdeva Maharaj.
Changdeva Maharaj was stunned to see an inanimate wall being used as a vehicle. His false pride and ego was crashed in an instance and he suddenly alighted from the tiger, sat on his knees to salute Sant Dnyaneshwar. He then became one of the disciples of Sant Dnyaneshwar.
Just because you are older than others, doesn’t mean you are of higher stature. (Dnyaneshwar was just 12-13 years of age and Changdev Maharaj was more than 50 years when this incident took place.) As we know, capabilities bring more responsibilities. The more learned you are the less should be your ego and false pride. Rather, a learned person should never have an ego. Changdeva had so much power, but he had ego, and that was the worst part of it.
Ego kills the knowledge you have. Too much boasting on knowing something is very harmful. You are not the only one who knows things; there will always be someone else who knows more than you. If we have to take recent example, we can think of Sachin Tendulkar. Even after spending 23 years in the game of cricket, he is not complacent about his batting and playing prowess.
In short, a learned man should always be humble 🙂
Every day brings,
And a night
♥ ♥ ♥
With every morning,
Comes delicate sunshine,
Slowly making you ready,
To the rough and hot sun rays,
Those are to follow
♥ ♥ ♥
An afternoon slowly,
Takes you on roller coaster,
Making you jump and tumble,
With excitements and shocks,
Giving you the right mix
♥ ♥ ♥
An evening brings to you,
Setting Sun and soothing hues in sky,
Making your mind retrospect the day,
Do balancing of debit and credit,
And figure what went wrong
♥ ♥ ♥
And a night is the crux,
Makes you forget the tears,
Brings some smile on your face,
Relaxes the flexed muscles and,
Prepares your mind for dreams
♥ ♥ ♥
Doesn’t our life run on same path?
All the fun and enjoyment in early life,
Responsible, beating and learning adulthood,
Retrospective and experience rich old age,
And death that prepares you for next life.
♥ ♥ ♥
We are all immigrants who,
live on alien thoughts,
of what others endorse,
leaving behind our Own
>-< >-< >-<
We always find it fascinating,
things others get indulged in,
just for the sake of,
fitting in the social scene
>-< >-< >-<
Or else we feel rejected,
by the so called socialites,
in fact they do reject,
on grounds of social inequality
>-< >-< >-<
But I refuse to bend,
to such social pressure,
I like to live my life,
as a citizen and not immigrant.
>-< >-< >-<
Remember last time you said “Why this pain?”
Yea, sounds like you thought about this just some time before, right?
We have this knack of questioning God’s existence. Accepted that you can’t prove his existence, but then you can’t deny it too. Also, man has this habit of writing off all the credit of his success to his name and all the failures to God’s.
Some question, why there is pain if God is there. And I smile at their childish question. Well is it like if God is there your life is supposed to be all fairy tales? Let me ask you a corollary to it. If God is not there, then why isn’t your life complete hell then? Isn’t your life a balance of beauty and hell? Don’t you get happy moments along with those sad ones?
I have one rational theory behind the tragedies or pain that befalls on us.
Tragedies bring people together, who otherwise wouldn’t have come together.
Consider various live examples in front of us. There have been numerous tragedies in Mumbai (or Bombay, whatever you call it). And you see people flocking in and pooling their efforts to save the victims of the tragedy.
Many a times I have seen it on Twitter, when it rains in Mumbai and roads are water logged, people tweet saying “I am travelling by so and so road. If anyone wants a ride home, hop in”.
Hadn’t it been for tragedy, would you have considered tweeting that? Would you ask someone, besides your friends, to hop in while on way home?
It’s another thing that soon after the meet, we forget about the person who helped you and whom you helped. That was an opportunity to be a human being to another human, and you lose it by not keeping in contact.
Coming back to the point, what I mean is, pain or tragedy comes in our life intermittently just for reminding us that your life cannot be all hunky dory all the time. You lose someone close to you, to learn how to live a life independently. Yea, this is a harsh way to teach things to us, but then that’s the way it is handled.
Because we don’t listen to a lecture if it is free of cost. But when we pay for it, we try to grab every word spoken by the orator.
And as far as God’s reference in this post is concerned, I strongly believe in God. Not the way a priest might believe in, but in more rational way. His presence has simply been brought into existence because we wanted some point, whereto we could stare and find the calmness we want in those anxious moments.
And the pain you suffer is bound to be that way. You are bound to suffer because of your deeds. God neither bring the pain to your life nor does he take it away from your life.