u/Mitali_M_INDIA

​

Most of us know Leonardo da Vinci as the man who painted the Mona Lisa.

But that is only one part of his story.

Leonardo filled notebooks with observations and drawings about anatomy, water, plants, animals, engineering, machines, flight and much more. He wrote in mirror script, and he dissected human bodies to understand anatomy for himself. He wasn't simply collecting information; he kept looking closely and asking questions.

That makes me wonder about something quite ordinary.

How often do we stop ourselves from trying something because it doesn't fit the person we already think we are ?

“I am a science student, so I'm not artistic.”

“I'm not good at maths.”

“I'm already too old to start.”

“People know me for this. What will they think if I suddenly try something else?”

We can become very attached to being the good one at something. Then being a beginner feels uncomfortable. We would rather protect an identity we already have than risk looking clumsy while learning something new.

Leonardo's life makes that worth questioning.

He was a painter, but he also studied anatomy and engineering. His notebooks show how closely his different interests were connected. And many of his works were left unfinished.

That doesn't mean unfinished work is automatically good, or that everyone should try to become a “Renaissance person.”

Maybe the simpler question is:

What are we not exploring because we are too concerned about how we will look while learning ?

Perhaps before asking, “Will I be good at this?”, it is worth asking:

“What can I actually see, learn or understand here?”

Leonardo spent his later years in France at the Clos Lucé after accepting an invitation from King Francis I. He died there in 1519.

One last question, just for fun, without Googling:

In which country did Leonardo da Vinci spend the final years of his life ?

A) Italy

B) Spain

C) France

D) England

And beyond the quiz:

What is something you have wanted to learn but kept postponing because you were afraid of being a beginner ?

Sources :

https://www.nga.gov/artists/1479-leonardo-da-vinci

https://museoleonardiano.it/en/leonardo-in-vinci/biografia/

Here’s a Gita exam question that caught my attention.

Imagine Rachel earns a comfortable salary. During the month, she spends thousands on shopping, restaurants and entertainment without thinking much about it.

Then she sees a book that might help her understand herself.

₹300.

Suddenly, ₹300 feels like too much.

There is something funny about this.

Many of us have probably done some version of it. A few thousand can disappear on a dinner, a sale, a new gadget or something seen on Instagram. But when it comes to something that might actually make us stop, think and question ourselves, we suddenly become very careful with money.

Why?

Maybe money isn't always the real variable.

A new shirt doesn't ask many questions. Neither does a restaurant meal, a movie or another online purchase. They can give pleasure, distraction or simply continue what we are already doing.

But a book that asks us to look at ourselves is different.

It may ask uncomfortable questions.

Why do I want this ?

What am I running after ?

Why do I need this particular image of myself ?

Am I actually happy with the way I am living ?

And perhaps that is where the hesitation begins.

This isn't about saying books are always better than entertainment or that spending money on yourself is wrong. It is about noticing something more subtle:

What are we willing to spend money on, and what are we unwilling to spend attention on ?

I can see this tendency in myself too. Sometimes the problem isn't that we don't have money. We simply don't stop long enough to ask where it is going and what we are actually getting from it.

So, without looking up the answer:

Which option would you choose in this question, and why ?

More importantly, does this situation remind you of anything you have noticed in your own spending ?

A woman goes through pregnancy for nine months, undergoes a C- section, delivers a whole human being and before the baby has even figured out which end is up, everyone is impressed that new Mum has somehow got her flat tummy back. 😄

Especially with celebrities, we sometimes see women looking remarkably slim very soon after childbirth. And the immediate reaction is 'How?? 😳What is her secret?'.

Well…the secret may be a tummy tuck/abdominoplasty, occasionally performed along with the C-section.

And this isn't quite as harmless as the Instagram before and after makes it look.

Studies looking at combined C-section + abdominoplasty have reported complications including wound infection, wound separation, seroma, skin necrosis and thrombosis. One study of 50 women reported wound infection in 18% and skin necrosis in 12%.

Another study of 808 combined procedures reported substantial postoperative complications and recommended avoiding the combination before six months postpartum.

But the medical complications aren't actually what got me thinking.

It is the psychology behind it.

Why is a woman's postpartum body treated like a defective product that needs to be restored to factory settings?

Pregnancy stretches the skin, separates abdominal muscles, changes breasts, redistributes fat and takes a huge physiological toll. Then the baby arrives and we are somehow checking the mother's abdomen before she's even finished recovering from surgery. 😐

Healing takes time. The postpartum body is not supposed to look like the pre-pregnancy body immediately. Accepting that change , rather than seeing every stretch mark, scar or loose skin as a personal failure is psychologically important.

And this is where Acharya Prashant's article 'How to get rid of body-identification as a woman' made me think.

If my identity and self-worth are heavily invested in how my body looks, then pregnancy becomes almost an existential crisis. The body changes ➡️

I feel less attractive ➡️ I feel less worthy ➡️ I need to 'fix' the body. ➡️

I feel temporarily better ➡️ and eventually another imperfection becomes the new problem.

A tummy tuck can tighten the tummy.But can it tighten the insecurity?

That's the question I am interested in.

Going for cosmetic surgery is finally a woman's choice.

I am just wondering why, after creating an entire human being, a woman is expected to immediately start apologising for the stretch marks. 🤔

The postpartum body doesn't need a 'before/after'..maybe it just needs time to heal.❤️‍🩹

Source

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20809378/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31342126/

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/46109118\_Abdominoplasty\_Combined\_with\_Cesarean\_Delivery\_Evaluation\_of\_the\_Practice

How to get rid of body-identification as a woman? || Acharya Prashant (2019)

​

A mangalsutra can be a beautiful part of a marriage. For many women, it carries love, family, tradition and personal meaning.

But there is something else worth looking at.

Growing up, I have seen women around me treat the mangalsutra as more than jewellery. If it isn't worn for a day, there can be questions:

“Why aren't you wearing it?”

“What will people say?”

“Will your family notice?”

Sometimes even the woman herself becomes uncomfortable.

And then there are different designs for different festivals, occasions and preferences. What began as a marital symbol can also become part of appearance, status and identity.

This isn't an argument for wearing it or removing it.

It is a question about why.

Historically, marriage symbols in India have never been exactly the same everywhere. Different communities have had different forms of marital markers: mangalsutra, tali, sindoor, toe rings, bangles and others. Even the mangalsutra itself has changed in form and meaning across regions and communities.

So perhaps the interesting question isn't:

“Is the mangalsutra good or bad?”

It is:

“What happens inside us when a symbol becomes part of who we think we are?”

A woman may look at the mangalsutra and think, “I am married.”

But if she takes it off, does something deeper feel threatened?

The marriage?

The relationship?

Or the image of “me” that has been built around being a married woman ?

And this isn't only about women or mangalsutras.

We all have things that have quietly become part of our identity : our clothes, religion, job, surname, money, relationships, achievements, possessions.

Take one away and watch the mind.

Why does it feel uncomfortable?

What exactly are we trying to protect?

Maybe the point isn't to reject tradition.

Maybe it is to see whether we are following something because we have understood it or because the identity attached to it has become too difficult to question.

Have you ever noticed yourself becoming uncomfortable when something external that represents “who you are” is taken away ? What does that discomfort reveal ?

Sources:

Indian Express - How the concept of Mangal Sutra has evolved over the centuries "Indian Express article" ( https://www.google.com/amp/s/indianexpress.com/article/research/how-the-concept-of-mangal-sutra-has-evolved-over-the-centuries-7607983/lite/ )

Indian Express — Sindoor, mangalsutra or feminism? "Indian Express opinion piece" (https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/indian-weddings-feminism-sindoor-mangalsutra-inter-caste-marriages-9098266/ )

https://academic.oup.com/book/7524/chapter-abstract/152476025

They have been suppressed by taliban government and pretty much lost all their rights, what do you think will be the future of women in Afghanistan?

​

Try this: watch someone yawn.

There is a good chance you will yawn too. And now that I have mentioned it, maybe you are already thinking about yawning. 😄

For years, a common explanation was that we yawn because our body needs more oxygen or needs to get rid of excess carbon dioxide.

It sounds reasonable.

But when researchers actually tested that idea, it didn't hold up. In one experiment, people breathed 100% oxygen or air with increased carbon dioxide, and their yawning did not change as that explanation predicted.

So why do we yawn?

The honest answer is: science still doesn't have one settled explanation.

Yawning is associated with changes in alertness and the sleep-wake cycle. Several ideas have been studied, including a role in arousal and temperature regulation. There is evidence pointing in these directions, but none has been established as the complete explanation.

And then there is the strange part: yawning can spread from one person to another.

Seeing or even hearing another person yawn can trigger a yawn in us without us deciding to do it. Recent research continues to investigate how this works and what it might tell us about social behaviour.

Think about how ordinary this is.

We yawn all the time.

We have theories about it.

We repeat those theories.

And yet something as familiar as a yawn still isn't completely understood.

That made me think about something beyond yawning.

How often do we accept an explanation simply because we have heard it many times?

“This is just how things are.”

“Everyone knows this.”

“That's just how I am.”

Maybe the problem isn't having a wrong idea. We will all have those.

The more interesting question is whether we are willing to look again when the evidence doesn't support what we thought was true.

That applies to science, but also to our own lives.

A belief can feel so familiar that we stop noticing it is a belief.

So perhaps the useful question isn't only:

“What do I believe?”

but:

“How did I come to believe it, and what would make me question it?”

The next time you yawn, maybe just notice it.

You didn't decide to do it.

You may not even know exactly why it happened.

And that small everyday mystery is a good reminder:

Not knowing is not a failure. Pretending to know when we haven't looked closely is.

What is something you have always considered “obvious” that you have never actually examined for yourself ?

Sources :

1)https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3120687/

2)https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42002059/

The Beauty on Your Wrist: What Are You Willing to Ignore for Tradition?

💔 What if the beautiful bangles we celebrate as symbols of tradition carry a story of suffering that we simply never bothered to look at?

Lac bangles are deeply woven into Indian weddings, festivals, celebrations, and everyday culture. They are colorful, beautiful, and often described as natural and traditional.

But should "traditional" be enough to make us stop questioning what lies behind the product?

Lac is a resin produced by tiny insects called lac bugs. They secrete this resin as part of their natural life process, including to protect themselves and their eggs. The resin is harvested, processed, melted, shaped, and dyed to create the bangles we see in markets and celebrations.

And according to the information presented in the message, producing one kilogram of lac can involve the deaths of hundreds of thousands of insects.

That forces us to pause.

Because when we call something "natural," we rarely ask:

Natural for whom?

🌱 Natural does not automatically mean harmless.

Traditional does not automatically mean ethical.

Beautiful does not automatically mean innocent.

And cultural does not mean beyond questioning.

🐜 The lives hidden behind something we call beautiful

When branches containing lac insects are harvested and processed, insects can be killed through crushing and heat processing. Their remains can also become part of the waste removed during processing.

The exact figures and production practices can vary by method and region, so such claims deserve careful verification. But even the basic fact that lac is an insect-derived material raises an important question for anyone trying to live with greater compassion.

If we can choose an alternative that gives us the same beauty without deliberately using an animal-derived material, why wouldn't we?

This is where veganism becomes more than a question of food.

It becomes a question of consciousness.

Acharya Prashant often points toward a simple but uncomfortable inquiry: What is the center from which we act?

Are we consuming because we genuinely need something?

Or are we satisfying a habit, a social expectation, an aesthetic desire, or the need to belong?

The deeper issue is not merely the bangle.

The deeper issue is our willingness to look.

👧 And then there is another question

The concerns do not necessarily end with animals.

Reports have raised concerns about child labor and hazardous working conditions in some lac-producing and bangle-making regions. Children have reportedly been found working in difficult environments involving heat, poor ventilation, and long working hours.

If even part of what we wear carries a hidden cost paid by vulnerable beings, both human and non-human, shouldn't that change the way we look at it?

We often admire the finished product because the suffering involved in producing it has been carefully kept out of sight.

That is the strange power of consumption.

We see the polished bangle.

We don't see the insect.

We see the tradition.

We don't see the labor.

We see the color.

We don't see the cost.

🌿 Do we really need suffering to preserve beauty?

Probably not.

Glass, metal, wood, and plant-based materials can offer beautiful alternatives. The appearance of a traditional accessory can often be recreated without depending on animal-derived materials.

So the question is not:

"Should we destroy our traditions?"

Perhaps the better question is:

"Can our traditions evolve as our understanding deepens?"

A tradition becomes truly beautiful when compassion becomes part of it.

And perhaps this is where the teaching of Acharya Prashant becomes especially relevant.

Spirituality is not merely about what we believe.

It is about becoming sensitive enough to see the consequences of our actions.

The moment we truly see suffering, can we continue participating in it merely because it is beautiful, convenient, customary, or socially accepted?

Maybe freedom begins when we stop saying:

"Everyone does it."

And start asking:

"Now that I know, what is the right thing to do?"

So before buying the next pair of bangles, perhaps take a moment to ask what they are made of, where they came from, and what had to happen for them to reach your wrist.

Because sometimes the most beautiful thing we can wear is not a particular color or design.

It is the absence of unnecessary harm. 🌱❤️

And here is the uncomfortable question: If you knew that something you considered beautiful was created through the suffering or death of another living being, would you still call it beautiful?

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DcZ3m8azrG5

​

Manjhi: The Mountain Man is not just a story about a man breaking a mountain.

After his wife Phaguniya died when she could not receive medical help in time, Dashrath Manjhi began cutting a path through the mountain separating his village from the road to medical care. With a hammer and chisel, he kept at it for 22 years. The path he eventually carved was about 110 metres long and reduced the distance between Atri and Wazirganj from 55 km to 15 km.

What makes the story striking is not only the size of the mountain.

It is the simplicity of his direction.

People called him mad. They questioned what one man with a hammer and chisel could possibly achieve. But he kept going.

There is something very different between saying, “I want to achieve something great,” and seeing clearly, “This needs to be done, and I can do what is in my hands right now.”

The first can easily become about the image of ourselves.

The second can be much quieter.

There is no guarantee of success. No audience. No certainty about how long it will take.

Just the next stroke of the hammer.

This made me think of Nishkama Karma, not as a slogan about giving up results, but as a question: Can action become so clear that we stop constantly asking what we will get from it ?

We often sit with questions like:

What if I fail ?

What will people think ?

What if this takes too long ?

What will I get out of it ?

And sometimes, while calculating all of this, we don't do the thing that is actually in front of us.

Maybe the deeper question is not whether we can become as extraordinary as Manjhi.

It is much closer to everyday life:

When something genuinely needs to be done, can we see it clearly enough to stop making ourselves the centre of the action ?

Maybe the mountain does not always need to move all at once.

Maybe we just need to pick up the hammer.

Have you seen Manjhi: The Mountain Man? What did his story make you question about your own way of working and acting ?

Source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manjhi\_%E2%80%93\_The\_Mountain\_Man