Is Monetisation Really the Measure of a Blog’s Success?

There is a question many bloggers eventually ask themselves:

“If my blog isn’t making money, what is the point of continuing?”

It is a reasonable question.

Blogging takes time. Writing takes effort. Research takes patience. Editing, creating images, responding to readers and maintaining a website all require commitment.

So it is natural to measure the result in money.

But there is a problem with looking at blogging only through the lens of monetisation.

A blog can create value long before it creates revenue.

And sometimes, the most important thing a blogger is building is not a revenue engine at all.

It is an audience-building engine.

What if we temporarily remove monetisation from the equation?

Imagine this business model:

Content → Reach → Trust → Audience

There is no advertising revenue in this model.

No affiliate income.

No paid subscriptions.

No sponsored posts.

No products being sold.

Does that mean nothing is happening?

Absolutely not.

Something very important is being built.

1. Content creates an asset

Every useful article you publish becomes part of your body of work.

Unlike a conversation that disappears after it ends, a good blog post can remain discoverable for months or years.

Your thoughts become searchable.

Your experiences become documented.

Your knowledge becomes accessible to people you may never meet.

Over time, hundreds of individual articles can become something much larger:

a personal library of ideas.

That itself has value.

2. Distribution creates reach

Writing something useful is only the beginning.

People have to discover it.

Your website, search engines, Pinterest, social media, newsletters and other channels can distribute your ideas beyond your immediate circle.

This changes the nature of blogging.

You are no longer writing only for the people you already know.

You are creating something that can travel.

A reader in another city—or another country—can discover something you wrote months earlier and find it useful today.

That is reach.

3. Consistency creates trust

One article may attract a visitor.

Consistent publishing can create a relationship.

When readers repeatedly encounter thoughtful, useful and authentic content from the same source, familiarity develops.

Over time, familiarity can become trust.

This is particularly important for a personal blog.

Readers don’t necessarily return because every article is perfect.

They return because they know what kind of experience they are likely to find.

Consistency gives a blog an identity.

4. Trust creates an audience

A visitor is not necessarily an audience member.

Someone may arrive through Google, read one article and leave.

But another reader may return tomorrow.

Then next week.

Then next month.

Eventually, that reader may recommend your work to someone else.

That is how an audience develops.

And an audience is not simply a traffic number.

An audience is a group of people who have chosen to give your ideas their attention.

Attention is valuable.

Trust makes it more valuable.

So, has a non-monetised blog failed?

Not necessarily.

It depends on what the blogger is trying to build.

If the only objective is immediate income, then monetisation is obviously an important measure.

But if the objective is to build:

•    a body of knowledge,

•    a personal brand,

•    credibility,

•    a community,

•    an intellectual archive,

•    an audience,

•    opportunities,

•    professional relationships,

•    or a platform for future projects,

then revenue is not the only measure of progress.

The mistake is assuming that every valuable asset must produce money immediately.

It doesn’t.

A garden does not become useless because it has not produced fruit this morning.

It first needs soil, roots, water and time.

A blog can work the same way.

Monetisation can be added later. But it doesn’t have to be the reason the blog exists.

In fact, trying to monetise too early can distract a blogger from a more fundamental question:

“Am I creating something people genuinely want to read?”

That question comes first.

What should a blogger measure instead?

If you are not monetising your blog, don’t conclude that you have no results.

Measure other forms of progress, and know where to find each one.

Look at:

Readers: Are more people discovering your work? Your blog’s own statistics (Jetpack Stats, if you use WordPress) show views and visitors over time.

Returning visitors: Are people coming back? Google Analytics separates new visitors from returning ones, and a growing subscriber list tells the same story.

Engagement: Are readers commenting, sharing or responding?

Search visibility: Are your older articles being discovered through search? Google Search Console shows how often each article appears in search results, how often it is clicked, and the searches that led readers to it.

Content library: Is your collection of useful articles growing? Count how many older posts still draw visits each month, not just how many you have published.

Reach: Are your ideas travelling to new audiences? The referrers and countries listed in your statistics show where readers come from.

Trust: Are people beginning to recognise your voice and associate it with a particular kind of content? Subscribers, personal replies and recommendations are its clearest signs.

These measurements tell you whether your blog is genuinely building an audience.

When the numbers say something must change

Honesty requires a caveat.

Patience is not the same as ignoring evidence.

If, after a year of steady publishing, your articles barely appear in search, no reader ever returns and nobody responds, the engine is not yet working.

That rarely means you should simply stop. More often, it means something needs to change:

•    the topics may be too broad for anyone to find,

•    the titles may not reflect what readers actually search for,

•    the articles may answer questions nobody is asking,

•    or the work may not be reaching beyond the people who already know you.

Sometimes the honest answer is personal rather than technical. If blogging has become a burden that crowds out more important commitments, stepping back is a legitimate decision, not a failure.

The point is not that every blog must continue forever.

It is that money should not be the only test of whether it should.

Your old articles may still be working

This is one of the most interesting characteristics of blogging.

A social-media post may receive attention for a short period and then disappear from the feed.

A useful blog article can continue working.

Someone can discover an article through search months after publication.

Another reader can find it through Pinterest.

Someone else can arrive through an internal link from another article.

Your archive therefore isn’t simply a collection of old posts.

It is an accumulated distribution network for your ideas.

The more useful content you create, the more entry points readers have into your world.

Don’t confuse traffic with the whole audience

There is another important distinction.

Traffic is not the same as audience.

Traffic tells you that people arrived.

Audience tells you that some people have a reason to return.

That is why building trust matters.

A blogger who receives 1,000 visitors once may have generated impressive traffic.

A blogger who has 200 people who regularly return may have something different:

a relationship with an audience.

Neither number should be viewed in isolation.

The important point is that successful blogging is not simply about attracting clicks.

It is about creating reasons for people to come back.

What happens when monetisation eventually enters?

If you later decide to monetise, you are not starting from zero.

You may already have:

•    content,

•    search visibility,

•    an established archive,

•    readers,

•    trust,

•    distribution channels,

•    an identifiable voice,

•    and an audience.

In other words, you may already have built much of the foundation.

Monetisation then becomes another layer added to the system.

That is very different from trying to monetise a blog that nobody knows exists.

A different way to think about blogging

Perhaps the better question isn’t:

“How much money did my blog make this month?”

Perhaps there are other questions worth asking:

“How much useful knowledge did I create?”

“How many people discovered it?”

“Did I earn the trust of any new readers?”

“Did someone find my writing useful enough to return?”

“Is my body of work becoming more valuable over time?”

These questions don’t replace financial measurements when monetisation is the goal.

They simply remind us that money is not the only form of value a blog can create.

Your blog may be building something you cannot yet see

Every article is a small contribution to a larger asset.

One post may seem insignificant.

One reader may seem insignificant.

One comment may seem insignificant.

But hundreds of posts, thousands of readers, years of consistency and accumulated trust can produce something that did not exist when you published your first article.

A platform.

A reputation.

A community.

A body of work.

An audience.

And perhaps, eventually, an opportunity you could not have predicted when you started.

What three years of daily publishing have taught me

I don’t write this as theory.

Rise & Inspire has published a new post every day for more than three years: over 1,080 consecutive posts, without a single missed day.

None of it was built around a monetisation plan.

The posts range widely: daily Wake-Up Calls reflections on Scripture, plain-language explainers on law, notes on Linux and the command line, and responses to daily writing prompts.

Taken one at a time, each is simply a post written on a single day.

Taken together, they have become something I could not have produced any other way: an archive of more than a thousand pieces, a discipline that no longer depends on mood, and a voice that readers can recognise across very different subjects.

The archive also keeps working on the days I am not writing. Older posts continue to be found long after the day they were published.

That is the model in this article, tested over more than a thousand mornings.

Content became an archive. Consistency became trust. And that trust, one day at a time, has been building an audience.

So, should you stop blogging because your blog isn’t monetised?

Not necessarily.

First ask yourself what you are actually trying to build.

If your answer is an income-generating business, then study monetisation.

But if your answer is to share ideas, develop your voice, help people, document what you learn, build an audience and create a lasting body of work, then your blog may already be doing exactly what you intended.

The absence of monetisation does not automatically mean the absence of value.

Sometimes, before a blog becomes a revenue engine, it needs to become something more fundamental:

an audience-building engine.

And that may be a worthwhile achievement in itself.

If this article was useful, you don’t have to rely on finding the next one by chance. Subscribe to Rise & Inspire to receive each new post by email, and become one of the returning readers this article is about.

What are you really building with your blog—the revenue engine, the audience‑building engine, or both?

John Britto Kurusumuthu
Founder, Rise & Inspire

Explore more at the Rise & Inspire archive | Personal Development

© 2026 Rise & Inspire.

Website: Home | Blog | About Us | Contact | Resources

Is Google’s New Laptop a True MacBook Alternative?

TECH INSIGHTS | RISE & INSPIRE

Ecosystems of Thought: From Googlebook to the Timeless Mac

Google’s new laptops promise to do for Android what the Mac has long done for the iPhone. Look closer, and the contest turns out to be less a rivalry of machines than a contrast of approaches to personal computing, built on increasingly sophisticated AI foundations.

By John Britto Kurusumuthu · 01 October 2026

Friends, a quick question before you buy your next laptop: which phone is in your pocket? Google has just launched Googlebook, a premium Android laptop starting at US $899 that can pick up tasks from your phone, bring Android apps and phone content onto the larger screen, and put Gemini within reach of the cursor. Apple, meanwhile, has spent more than a decade refining the connection between iPhone and Mac, while its latest Apple Foundation Models were developed in collaboration with Google using technologies behind the Gemini family.

In my latest Tech Insights post, I compare the two ecosystems side by side: features, prices, availability — India is not yet on Googlebook’s launch list — and the deeper question of what kind of help we actually want from our machines. Would you choose a laptop that brings assistance closer to your work, or one whose tools largely disappear into the background? I would love to hear your view in the comments.

In our fast-moving digital age, technology rarely arrives quietly. It announces itself with sweeping promises, launch events and pre-order pages. This season’s most talked-about arrival is Googlebook: a new category of laptop that Google describes as built for Gemini Intelligence and designed, from the first sign-in, to work in step with an Android phone.

It sounds enticing, modern and forward-looking. And unlike many announcements, it is no longer a concept. The first Googlebooks are available to pre-order now and reach store shelves in early October.

Yet when we step back from the excitement of pre-orders and clever product names, an illuminating question presents itself.

If we look at this through the lens of a MacBook, what story is being told?

What Google Has Actually Launched

Google first unveiled Googlebook on 12 May 2026 and opened pre-orders on 21 September. The laptops go on sale on 4 October in the United States and on 5 October in the United Kingdom, Canada, Ireland, France, Germany and Australia. Google has not announced a launch date or pricing for India.

The first wave brings five laptops from Acer, ASUS, Dell, HP and Lenovo, starting at US $899. Every model carries at least 16 GB of memory, while some configurations reach 32 GB. The lineup includes displays up to 2.8K OLED, with processors from Intel, Qualcomm and MediaTek. These are premium machines, a deliberate step up from the budget Chromebooks many schools know well.

Underneath runs Googlebook OS, which Google describes as built on the Android technology stack and paired with desktop foundations from ChromeOS. In daily use, that translates into a set of signature features:

·       Continue On. Begin a task on your Android phone and pick it up on the laptop where you left off.

·       Cast My Apps. Open apps from your phone on the laptop screen without installing them a second time.

·       Your phone, in Files. Browse your phone’s screenshots and downloads from the laptop. Signing in can also bring across saved passwords, Wi-Fi networks and message history.

·       Magic Pointer. Wiggle the cursor to bring Gemini to whatever is on screen. You can ask it to explain, organize or transform selected content; importantly, Google says Gemini acts when you ask it to, and the feature can be switched off.

·       Rambler and Create My Widget. Rambler turns spoken thoughts into organized writing, while Create My Widget lets you describe a widget in plain language and generates one for your desktop. Google’s current launch material presents these as part of the Googlebook experience.

Googlebook also combines the web and Play Store with native creative tools such as Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Lightroom and CapCut. Developers get a full terminal environment and Linux tools, while the platform uses ChromeOS-derived security architecture, a Titan hardware root of trust and up to ten years of updates. What Googlebook cannot do is run Windows or macOS software.

The Power of Silent Harmony

When you examine the philosophy behind the Mac, you realise that the bridge Google is now building is one Apple has been refining for more than a decade. Handoff, together with the ability to take calls and texts on a Mac, arrived with OS X Yosemite in 2014. Google’s own framing of Googlebook highlights the gap it is trying to close: Android users have not previously had a laptop platform designed around this kind of seamless phone integration.

The MacBook is not simply a laptop that happens to talk to a phone. It is a quiet study in intentional design.

·       Frictionless Continuity. The moment an iPhone rests beside a MacBook, an ecosystem-level connection becomes available. You can answer a call at your desk, copy a line on your phone and paste it into a manuscript, or use iPhone Mirroring to view and interact with the phone from the Mac. In macOS 27, Apple has added further refinements to this continuity.

·       Architecture with Purpose. macOS and Apple silicon are designed together. Apple’s current Mac lineup includes the MacBook Neo with the A18 Pro chip and MacBook Air models with M5, illustrating how Apple continues to blur the boundary between its mobile and desktop hardware families.

·       Intelligence with Discretion. Apple’s latest AI architecture combines on-device models with server-based models running through Private Cloud Compute. Siri AI is integrated into Spotlight and systemwide context menus on Mac, while Apple says its next-generation Foundation Models were developed in collaboration with Google and technologies behind Gemini.

The Twist in the Tale: Drawing from the Same Well

Here the story takes an unexpected turn. Apple’s latest Apple Foundation Models were custom-built in collaboration with Google. Apple says the work leverages technologies behind Google’s Gemini family of models, while Apple retains its own model architecture and privacy framework.

The processing path is layered. Apple’s Foundation Models include on-device models and server-based models running on Private Cloud Compute. For its most demanding workloads, Apple says it worked with Google and NVIDIA to extend Private Cloud Compute to NVIDIA GPUs in Google Cloud while maintaining Apple’s stated privacy protections.

The important distinction is therefore not simply Google intelligence versus Apple intelligence. Both ecosystems now use sophisticated AI, and both are integrating it deeply into the operating system. What differs is how that intelligence is invoked, how the ecosystem connects devices, and which privacy architecture users are asked to trust.

The Contrast: On-Demand Assistant and Creative Canvas

Dimension

Googlebook | The New Contender

MacBook | The Established Craft

Core anchor

An extension of the Android phone, built outward from the pocket

A mature desktop platform designed in harmony with the iPhone

Foundation

Googlebook OS: Android technology stack with ChromeOS desktop foundations; Intel or Qualcomm processors

macOS on Apple silicon; hardware and software designed as one system

Signature AI gesture

Magic Pointer: wiggle the cursor, select, ask Gemini

Visual Intelligence and Siri AI: select on screen or ask through Spotlight and systemwide controls

Intelligence posture

On-demand: Gemini acts when you ask; widgets can provide relevant updates

Context-aware: on-device models first, with Private Cloud Compute for more demanding workloads

App world

Android apps, Chrome/web apps, native creative tools and Linux tools; no Windows or macOS software

Mac and professional desktop software; no native Android software environment

Entry price (US)

From $899

From $699 (MacBook Neo); MacBook Air from $1,299

Availability

US from 4 October; UK, Canada, Ireland, France, Germany and Australia from 5 October; India not yet announced

Sold in India and other markets

Daily feel

Assistance is brought close to the task, but Gemini acts when invited

A quieter canvas in which many tools remain in the background

US starting prices as of September 2026; they vary by configuration and retailer. Apple’s MacBook Neo was introduced at a lower launch price and subsequently increased in price in some markets; the table uses the current U.S. figures referenced in the original article.

Choosing Wisely: Which Ecosystem Fits Your Life?

Because ecosystems now begin in your pocket, the useful place to start is not the laptop but the phone you already carry.

Android and Google Workspace. If your days run on an Android phone and on Gmail, Docs and Drive, Googlebook offers a tightly integrated route into Google’s new laptop ecosystem. Wait for independent reviews after the machines ship in October before you commit.

iPhone households. If your home and office run on iPhone, the Mac remains deeply integrated with that ecosystem, and macOS 27 extends that relationship further.

Windows-dependent work. If you rely on Windows-only software, as many accounting, legal and engineering offices still do, a Windows laptop with Microsoft’s Phone Link remains another practical route. Its Android companion app, Link to Windows, has passed a billion downloads on the Play Store.

Test the essentials first. Whatever you choose, confirm your key applications, file formats, printer compatibility, keyboard layout and the languages you write in before you buy.

A Quiet Reflection on Meaningful Tech

In Being and Time, the philosopher Martin Heidegger described how a hammer in skilled hands seems to withdraw from our attention. While it works, we think not of the hammer but of the nail, the wood and the thing we are building. The tool becomes conspicuous only when it fails.

At Rise & Inspire, we often ask whether technology is at its best when it stops demanding attention and leaves us free to write, create and reflect.

A new category of laptop designed around mobile-first thinking will undoubtedly find its place and will serve many who live and work within Android’s world. Competition, too, can sharpen the tools we already use. But technological maturity is not measured merely by how many tasks a machine can anticipate or assist with. It is also measured by reliability, clarity and the amount of friction it removes from daily work.

When a tool respects your time, guards your concentration and simply works without unnecessary friction, it ceases to be a novelty. It becomes an enduring companion on the journey of purposeful living.

OVER TO YOU

What do you value most in your daily workstation: assistance that is close at hand when you ask for it, or a quiet, seamless canvas that lets you work to your own rhythm? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

SOURCES

1.         Google, The Keyword — Introducing Googlebook, designed for Gemini Intelligence (12 May 2026).

2.         Google, The Keyword — Googlebook: The laptop your Android phone has been waiting for (21 September 2026).

3.         Google, Googlebook official website (accessed 28 September 2026).

4.         Engadget — Google’s pitch for Googlebooks: A laptop that works better with your Android phone (21 September 2026).

5.         Engadget — I tried every new Googlebook announced today (21 September 2026).

6.         9to5Google — Google fully details Googlebooks: $899+, October launch, & more (21 September 2026).

7.         Digit — Google launches Googlebook laptops: Price, features and all details (22 September 2026).

8.         MacRumors — 50 New macOS Golden Gate Features and Changes Worth Checking Out (17 September 2026).

9.         MacRumors — Apple Announces $599 ‘MacBook Neo’ With A18 Pro Chip (4 March 2026).

10.    Business Standard — WWDC 2026: Apple unveils Siri AI, Gemini-powered Apple Intelligence, more (9 June 2026).

11.    Macworld — How much Gemini is really inside Siri AI? (June 2026).

12.    Macworld — From Cheetah to Golden Gate: Every version of macOS Apple has released (September 2026).

13.    9to5Mac — Apple announces significant price increases for MacBooks, iPads, more (25 June 2026).

14.    Apple — Introducing the Third Generation of Apple’s Foundation Models (8 June 2026).

15.    Apple Security Research — Expanding Private Cloud Compute (8 June 2026).

16.    Apple India — Siri AI, a profoundly more capable and personal assistant, is here (September 2026).

17.    Apple India — Buy Mac (current pricing, accessed 1 October 2026).

John Britto Kurusumuthu
Founder, Rise & Inspire
Technology & Craft | riseandinspire.co.in

Explore more at the Rise & Inspire archive | Tech Insights |

© 2026 Rise & Inspire.

Website: Home | Blog | About Us | Contact| Resources

Word Count:2024

What Are Five Simple Exercises to Do at Home That You Will Actually Keep Doing?

What are five simple exercises to do at home?

The deeper idea is:

When exercise has an “address,” you don’t have to decide each day whether to do it; the routine itself tells you when it happens.

Every Exercise Needs an Address

Ask for five simple exercises to do at home and the internet will hand you five hundred. The lists are not the problem. Most of us already know how to stretch, breathe, and do a push-up. What we lack is not instruction but a place in the day. An exercise without a fixed time is only a good intention, and good intentions are the easiest things in the world to postpone.

So here are my five, each with the excuse it answers and the address where it can live.

1. Five minutes of freehand stretching, for “I have no time”

Neck rolls, shoulder circles, a gentle twist, a forward bend, and a set of calf raises to finish. Nothing heroic. Five minutes is small enough to survive a tired morning, and that is the point. A short routine done daily outlasts an elaborate programme abandoned in the second week. Give it an address: the minutes spent waiting for the kettle to boil.

2. Ten minutes of yoga, centred on the pelvis but reaching the whole body, for “I have no gym”

A mat and a floor are enough. Hip openers, the bridge, the cat-cow stretch, and a deep squat work the region where much of our movement begins, and the rest of the body follows. Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras, the classical Indian text on yoga, define posture in three Sanskrit words: sthira sukham asanam. A posture should be steady and easy. Not strained, not punishing. Easy. Give it an address: straight after the morning bath, on a mat that stays unrolled. A mat rolled up in a cupboard is an argument you will lose.

3. Ten minutes of breathing, for “I have no energy”

This is the exercise that looks like doing nothing, which is why it is so often skipped. Sit upright, slow the breath, lengthen the exhale, or try alternate-nostril breathing. The Tamil sage Thirumoolar admits in the Thirumanthiram [1] that he once thought the body a defect, until he found something precious within it. In a neighbouring verse he writes: “Udambai valarthen, uyir valarthene.” I nurtured the body, and so I nurtured life. Give it an address: before the phone is picked up in the morning.

4. Five minutes of dumbbells and push-ups, for “I have no equipment”

A pair of light dumbbells and a floor. Curls, presses, rows, and as many push-ups as come honestly; wall push-ups are a respectable start. Nearly two thousand years ago, the Stoic philosopher Seneca advised his friend Lucilius to prefer short, simple exercises such as running, lifting hand-weights, and jumping. They tire the body quickly and leave time for the mind. The advice has aged well. Give it an address: the five minutes before the evening news.

5. The walks and the cycling, for “I have no routine”

This is my fifth exercise, and the proof of everything above. A fifteen-minute walk half an hour after lunch. Fifteen minutes of cycling in the evening. Another fifteen minutes of walking before bed. These happen without fail, and not because I am unusually disciplined. They happen because lunch, evening, and bedtime never fail to arrive, and the movement simply rides along with them. “At home,” I have come to think, means within the rhythm of the household day, not only within four walls.

Other traditions knew this long before habit science did. In Japan, Radio Taiso has been broadcast every morning since 1928. It is a few minutes of simple calisthenics at the same hour each day, and it became a national habit through a fixed time, not a hard routine. In Islam, the five daily prayers, with their standing, bowing, and prostration, give movement an appointed place in every day. The lesson is the same: an appointed hour keeps what willpower alone cannot.

Add it up and the day holds about seventy-five minutes of movement, yet no single block runs longer than fifteen. Nothing is intense. It is simply distributed.

A fair objection

Is this too easy? Perhaps. Simple is not the same as sufficient forever. Over time the dumbbells can grow a little heavier and the push-ups a little more numerous. And anyone with back, pelvic, heart, or joint conditions should consult a doctor before starting yoga or strength work. But for most of us, the danger is not doing too little. It is planning too much and doing nothing.

So, five simple exercises to do at home? Any five will do, as long as each one has an address. The best exercise is not the hardest one. It is the one that knows what time it is.

[1] The Thirumanthiram is a Tamil work of about three thousand verses by Thirumoolar, a Siddhar (mystic-sage), and it is foundational to the Shaiva Siddhanta tradition of South India. Scholars date it variously, but it is generally held to be well over a thousand years old. The lines referred to are verses 724 and 725 in the standard numbering.

John Britto Kurusumuthu

Rise & Inspire · riseandinspire.co.in

In response to the WordPress Daily Writing Prompt — 30 September 2026

© 2026 Rise&Inspire. All Rights Reserved.

Website: Home | Blog | About Us | Contact| Resources

Word Count:909

Which Relationship Has Taught Me the Most About Myself?

Which relationship has taught you the most about yourself?

Some relationships teach us about other people. The deeper ones teach us about ourselves. They reveal how we respond to love, conflict, disappointment, trust, change, and uncertainty—and sometimes show us a version of ourselves we had never noticed before.

Which Relationship Has Taught Me the Most About Myself?

At first glance, the question seems simple:

Which relationship has taught me the most about myself?

My first instinct might be to think about the person who has been most important in my life—the person I have loved most, depended on most, or spent the most time with.

But that is not really what the question is asking.

It is asking something deeper.

It asks me to look beyond the other person and examine what the relationship has revealed about me.

A relationship can become a kind of mirror. I may enter it thinking I am learning how to understand another person. Over time, however, I may discover that I am also learning about my own character, expectations, fears, strengths and limitations.

Perhaps I discover that I am more patient than I thought.

Or perhaps I discover that I am not as patient as I imagined.

I may learn how much I value loyalty, honesty or independence. I may discover that I have a strong need to be understood, appreciated or accepted. I may realise that I sometimes expect others to think the way I do.

These discoveries are not always comfortable.

Some relationships reveal qualities I am proud of. Others expose weaknesses I would rather ignore. A disagreement may show me how I react when challenged. A period of silence may reveal how much I depend on communication. A misunderstanding may teach me whether I listen to understand or simply listen to respond.

That is why the most meaningful relationship is not necessarily the easiest one.

Sometimes the relationship that teaches me the most is the one that makes me look inward.

It may teach me that I cannot control another person’s thoughts or behaviour. I can only control how I respond. It may teach me the difference between compromise and surrender, between forgiveness and forgetting, or between caring for someone and losing myself in the process.

And sometimes, the greatest lesson is that I still have room to change.

Looking back, I may realise that the relationship did not simply teach me something about another person. It changed the way I see myself.

It showed me who I am when I am happy, disappointed, misunderstood, appreciated, challenged or hurt.

That may be the unexpected gift of relationships.

We often enter them asking, “Who is this person?”

Perhaps, with time, we begin asking a more important question:

“Who am I becoming because of this relationship?”

That question turns a relationship from merely an experience into a lesson.

And perhaps that is what makes some relationships unforgettable—not because they were perfect, but because they helped us see ourselves more clearly.

John Britto Kurusumuthu

Rise & Inspire · riseandinspire.co.in

In response to the WordPress Daily Writing Prompt — 29 September 2026

© 2026 Rise&Inspire. All Rights Reserved.

Website: Home | Blog | About Us | Contact| Resources

Word Count:534

Could Time, Not Money, Be the Currency of Your Next Business?

If you could start a new business right now, what would it be?

View all responses

I wrote a full business plan today: members, rules, running costs, the lot. Then I gave it away for free. No, I have not lost my mind. Yes, you can have it too.

Turning the giveaway into the closing twist.

A Business Plan, With One Condition

If you could start a new business right now, what would it be?

I have an answer, and I have worked it out in some detail: what it is, who it serves and how it pays its way. Let me lay it out plainly, the way a founder would. There is one condition attached, which I will come to at the end.

1. What it is

A neighbourhood time bank.

Members trade skills by the hour. One hour spent teaching someone to use a smartphone earns one hour of learning to cook, play the keyboard or fix a leaking tap. Every hour is worth the same, whether it belongs to a surgeon or a student.

The currency is time, and nobody gets more than twenty-four hours a day.

2. Who it serves

It serves retired people with skills and time but fewer opportunities to be asked for either. It serves young people with energy and technical skills but little money, and newcomers who know nobody on their street.

A Tamil saying traditionally attributed to Avvaiyar puts the case in one line: what we have learned is a handful of sand, and what we have not learned is the size of the world.¹ A time bank lets a street pool its handfuls.

3. How it runs

A simple app, or even a paper ledger, records hours given and received. A part-time coordinator matches requests with offers and checks that members are who they say they are.

The coordinator’s pay comes from a modest annual membership fee. Local businesses can sponsor the initiative, and schools or other institutions could use it to support approved community-service activities.

Costs stay low because the value comes from the members’ time, skills and willingness to help one another.

4. What it refuses

It would take no commission on hours. It would not sell members’ data or rank them with stars.

And it would never let anyone buy hours with money, because the moment time can be bought, the rich will own the calendar.

5. An old principle behind a modern design

The idea that knowledge grows when shared is very old.

A popular Sanskrit verse describes the ways learning surpasses other forms of wealth.² Thieves cannot steal it, kings cannot seize it and brothers cannot divide it, and unlike material treasure, it grows through use and sharing.

An Islamic teaching holds that when a person dies, their deeds come to an end except three, one of which is knowledge that continues to benefit others.³

The Panchatantra shows how stories and knowledge can travel across cultures. Its fables moved from India into Middle Persian, then Arabic, and subsequently into other languages through translation, adaptation and retelling.⁴

6. The honest objection

Time banks are not new. Versions of time-based exchange have existed for decades in many countries, and some have struggled to remain active once the founding enthusiasm faded. Hours can be difficult to balance fairly, and generous members can tire of giving more than they receive.

Every founder also knows the old saying that ideas are cheap and execution is everything.

All of this is true.

7. The condition

That is exactly why I would not start this business myself.

I would give it away.

Everything above is yours to copy, rename and run on your own street, with no licence, no fee and no credit required.

When Jonas Salk was asked who held the patent on his polio vaccine, he famously replied, “Could you patent the sun?“⁵

A time bank belongs to the neighbourhood that runs it, and a founder who does not live there would be the wrong owner.

If ideas are cheap, giving this one away costs me little. If execution is everything, then it belongs to whoever lives on the street and is willing to knock on the doors.

At this stage of life, I am less interested in owning things than in seeing them used.

My contribution is the blueprint.

Yours can be the first hour.

What idea are you holding on to that might do more good if you gave it away?

Notes

¹ “Katrathu kaimann alavu, kallathathu ulagalavu”, a saying traditionally attributed to the Tamil poet Avvaiyar.

² A well-known Sanskrit subhashita, or verse of wisdom, widely taught in Indian schools.

³ Recorded in the hadith collection Sahih Muslim.

⁴ The Panchatantra is a collection of Indian animal fables. Its stories were transmitted through Middle Persian and Arabic and later reached other languages through translation and adaptation.

⁵ Jonas Salk is widely reported to have used the phrase “Could you patent the sun?” when discussing ownership of the polio vaccine.

John Britto Kurusumuthu

Rise & Inspire · riseandinspire.co.in

In response to the WordPress Daily Writing Prompt — 28 September 2026

© 2026 Rise&Inspire. All Rights Reserved.

Website: Home | Blog | About Us | Contact| Resources

Word Count:863

 What Are the Best Eating Habits If “Healthy” Means Something Different to Everyone?

What are your best healthy eating habits?

Every morning at seven I eat the same breakfast: a handful of soaked nuts and a glass of warm water. Nothing about it would photograph well, but it taught me something I had missed for years. We talk about healthy food as if health were stamped on the ingredient. Yet the same food can nourish or burden depending on how much, when and why we eat it. 

In today’s post I share five habits that changed my relationship with food, including the hardest one: stopping before I am full. I also look at how a Buddhist king, a saying of the Prophet Muhammad, the elders of Okinawa and the ancient Greeks at Delphi all arrived at the same lesson. 

What is one eating habit that has served you well over the years?

The Trouble with the Word “Healthy”

At seven every morning, my breakfast is the same: a handful of soaked nuts, walnuts among them, and a glass of warm water. Nothing about it would photograph well. Yet this plain routine has taught me more about healthy eating than any list of superfoods.

What it taught me is this: we have put the word “healthy” in the wrong place.

We ask which foods are healthy, as if health were stamped on the ingredient itself. But a kilo of almonds eaten at one sitting is not healthy, and a festival sweet pressed into my hand by a neighbour is not a moral failure. The same food can nourish or burden, depending on how much, when, why and how it is eaten. Health is not a property of food. It is a property of the relationship between a person and a plate.

Seen that way, my best habits concern less what I eat than how I conduct that relationship.

  1. I do not eat simply because food is available. The open packet, the buffet, the plate refilled without asking: none of these is hunger. Before I reach, I try to ask whether I am hungry or merely near food.
  2. I do not rush a meal. Hurried eating is absent eating. When I sit down, chew slowly and notice what I am eating, I need less and enjoy more.
  3. I do not treat every craving as a command. A craving is information, not an instruction; often it is boredom or tiredness wearing the mask of appetite. Sometimes I honour it. I simply no longer obey it by reflex.
  4. I do not reinvent my plate every morning. The same simple breakfast at the same hour removes one daily negotiation with myself. Consistency, I have learned, outlasts enthusiasm. Even the soaking helps: tomorrow’s breakfast begins with a small decision made the night before.
  5. I stop before I am full. This is the hardest habit and, I suspect, the most important.

That last habit is hardly my discovery. It appears in strikingly similar form across traditions that never consulted one another.

In a Buddhist discourse, King Pasenadi of Kosala came to the Buddha panting after an enormous meal [1]. The Buddha offered him a short verse on knowing the measure in eating. The king had a young man recite it at every meal and reduced his portions gradually until the heaviness left him. The teaching named no forbidden food. It taught measure.

A hadith, a saying attributed to the Prophet Muhammad, puts it in memorable arithmetic: a third of the stomach for food, a third for drink, a third for breath. Older Okinawans speak of hara hachi bu, eating until eight parts in ten full. And in ancient Greece, “nothing in excess” was inscribed at the temple of Apollo at Delphi.

Four traditions, one striking lesson. the measure matters as much as the meal.

Is this too tidy? Perhaps. Food is not merely fuel. It is hospitality, celebration, memory and comfort, and a life that treats every meal as a calculation has lost something worth keeping. So I add a sixth habit, the one that protects the rest: I do not punish myself for enjoying food. Moderation that forbids all pleasure is only another kind of excess. I will also concede the obvious: measure cannot redeem everything, and what goes on the plate still matters. My claim is only that it is not the whole story.

When we are young, we eat for pleasure and for the moment. As we grow older, we begin to understand that every meal is also a conversation with our future self, the person who will inherit the habits we are shaping today.

The Tamil poet-mystic Tirumular [2] confessed in one verse that he once regarded the body as a flaw. Then he found something precious dwelling within it, and from that day he began to tend it with care. I recognise that turn. My handful of soaked nuts at seven o’clock is not a diet. It is a small daily act of respect for the body I have been given, and for the years it still has to carry me.

That, finally, is my best healthy eating habit: not a food, but a way of sitting down to one.

Notes

[1] The account appears in the Donapaka Sutta of the Samyutta Nikaya, part of the Pali Buddhist canon. Pasenadi ruled Kosala, a kingdom in northern India, and was a contemporary and lay follower of the Buddha.

[2] Tirumular was a Tamil Siddha poet whose Tirumantiram, some three thousand verses composed well over a thousand years ago, forms the tenth book of the Tirumurai, the canon of Tamil Shaiva devotional literature. The Siddha tradition treated care of the body as part of spiritual discipline.

John Britto Kurusumuthu

Rise & Inspire · riseandinspire.co.in

In response to the WordPress Daily Writing Prompt — 27 September 2026

© 2026 Rise&Inspire. All Rights Reserved.

Website: Home | Blog | About Us | Contact| Resources

Word Count:979

Whose Voice Is Deciding Which Way You Walk?

Category: Wake-up Calls
Sunday Series No. 7 — 27 September 2026

Reader’s Edition

Most of us are still walking along a road that somebody else’s sentence laid down. A teacher’s aside: you are not a maths person. A father’s verdict at dinner. A superior’s remark in the first year of a career. The speaker forgot it within the hour. The hearer has been walking in its direction for thirty years.

Words do not evaporate. They become roads.

Some of those roads were laid by our sentences. And through all that traffic of voices, one voice has been speaking the whole time, asking for one thing: Listen to me. Walk this way. It will go well with you.

This week’s seven verses keep returning to the mouth and the feet, to what we say and where we walk, and insist that the two are connected.

The Passage

Jeremiah 7:23

Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be my people; walk only in the way that I command you, so that it may be well with you.

ജറെമിയാ 7 : 23

എന്‍റെ വാക്ക് അനുസരിക്കുവിന്‍; ഞാന്‍ നിങ്ങളുടെ ദൈവവും നിങ്ങള്‍ എന്‍റെ ജനവുമായിരിക്കും. ഞാന്‍ നിങ്ങളോടു കല്‍പിക്കുന്ന മാര്‍ഗത്തിലൂടെ ചരിക്കുവിന്‍; നിങ്ങള്‍ക്കു ശുഭമായിരിക്കും.

A True Slogan and a People Who Would Not Hear

Jeremiah preached these words at the Temple gate around 609 BC, in a season of national danger. Yet Jerusalem felt safe. The crowd had a slogan: “This is the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD” (7:4).

Every word of it was true. Jeremiah called it deceptive, because it was being used as a charm — a sentence that reassured the speaker and asked nothing of his feet.

God’s reply reaches back to the Exodus: obey my voice. The Hebrew verb, shama’, means to hear, heed and obey all at once. Biblical Hebrew has no separate everyday verb for “obey.” By that vocabulary, a word from God that has not reached your feet has not yet been heard. Jeremiah even pictures God rising early to speak (7:13). The problem was never a silent God. It was a people who were always talking.

Six Verses Around One Command

What became of those who did not listen? “If you had walked in the way of God, you would be living in peace forever” (Baruch 3:13). It is Jeremiah’s road and Jeremiah’s promise, but the grammar has turned from command to regret. Yet in Scripture the “if only” is most often spoken by God himself (Deuteronomy 5:29; Isaiah 48:18; Luke 19:42). It is not a verdict. It is grief that has not given up.

Why could they not hear? “On the day of judgment you will have to give an account for every careless word you utter” (Matthew 12:36). Jesus said it after the Pharisees credited his healing of a blind and mute man to Beelzebul. The Greek word, argos, means literally “without work” — like the Temple slogan: true, pious, and doing nothing. The most dangerous idle words are the devout ones, because they feel like faithfulness.

What do careless words do to a person? In Tobit, Sarah has lost seven husbands on their wedding nights, and a maid tells her, “You are the one who kills your husbands!” (3:8). The words drive her to her father’s upper room, wanting to die. Yet she prays, and beneath that wish lies a simpler request: “command that respect be shown to me and pity be taken upon me, and that I hear reproach no more”(3:15). She wanted her name back. At that very moment, her prayer was heard in the glorious presence of God (3:16).

If words spoken to you have brought you to Sarah’s upper room, please speak today — to God, and to someone who can be with you. In India, call Tele-MANAS on 14416, free and at any hour; elsewhere, your local crisis line.

Can anyone guard their own mouth? Ben Sira, a lifelong teacher of wise speech, stopped advising and prayed: “Who will set a guard over my mouth and an effective seal upon my lips?” (Sirach 22:27). The question is a sigh — if only. And a seal is not a gag: it releases speech only at the right time, by the right hand.

How do I wait without falling? “Wait for his mercy; do not stray, or else you may fall” (Sirach 2:7). The Greek verb pictures swerving off the road. The danger is not the waiting. It is the shortcut that promises to shorten it.

Who carries us? “Blessed be the Lord, who daily bears us up” (Psalm 68:19). The Hebrew verb belongs to the load-bearer. Jeremiah asks us to walk in all the way God commands; Deuteronomy says God carried his people, as one carries a child, all the way they travelled (1:31). It is the same Hebrew phrase — one journey, seen from both ends.

The Central Tension

We would rather talk about God than listen to him. Talking keeps us in control. Listening, in the Hebrew sense, hands the direction of our lives to someone else.

So the question is not whether you know what God has said. It is this: whose voice has actually been deciding which way you walk?

A Rise & Inspire Moment

A slogan is a word that asks nothing of your feet.

In this Sunday’s Gospel, one son says “I go, sir,” and does not go; the other says “I will not,” and later changes his mind and goes (Matthew 21:28–32). Whenever God speaks in Scripture, somebody moves. If what you call your faith has never once changed the direction of your feet, it may be a slogan.

Living It This Week

  1. Keep a one-day ledger of your words. One evening, write down three things you said that day that did no good work, and one that did real good. Next day, repair one of the three.
  2. Retire one slogan. Choose a phrase you use to close a matter rather than act on it — “I’ll pray about it,” “I’ve forgiven him.” Make it true with one action, or stop saying it.
  3. Give back someone’s dignity. Think of a person you have labelled. Say one true, honouring sentence about them in the same company where the label was spoken.

A Short Prayer

God who rises early to speak,
you have been talking to me for a long time,
and I have been talking over you.
Forgive the words that did no good work,
and the true ones I used as charms.
Set a guard over my mouth,
teach me to wait without wandering,
and carry me through today.
Speak, and let me hear you with my feet. Amen.

Key Takeaway

Listen until the voice asks something of your feet — then walk, because the One who calls you to the road carries you all the way.

He has been rising early to speak for a very long time. Tomorrow morning, rise early to listen.

The complete study, with word studies and the daily video reflections for all seven verses, will follow on Rise & Inspire.

Whose Direction Are You Following in Life?

Fun fact: Hebrew has no everyday word for obey. Just hear. So God’s word counts as heard when your feet move. The new Sunday study is up.

RISE & INSPIRE | SUNDAY BIBLE SERIES Category: Wake-up Calls Sunday Series No. 7 — 27 September 2026 Scriptures of the week: 21 – 27 September 2026

Whose Voice Is Deciding Which Way You Walk?

Opening — Enter the Passage

Most of us are still walking along a road that somebody else’s sentence laid down.

It is usually a short sentence. A teacher’s aside in primary school: you are not a maths person. A father’s verdict across the dinner table: why can’t you be more like your brother? A superior’s remark in the first year of a career: people like you don’t rise here. Or, just as often, a good sentence: you have a gift for this; don’t waste it. The speaker forgot it within the hour. The hearer has been walking in its direction for thirty years.

Words do not evaporate. They become roads.

That means two uncomfortable things at once. The first is that somewhere in the world, people are walking along roads that our sentences built — sentences tossed off at the end of a tiring day, in a family group on the phone, across a staff-room table, and long since forgotten by us. The second is that in the constant traffic of voices — the ones that shaped us, the ones we produce, the ones streaming from the screen in our hand — there is one voice that has been speaking the whole time and asking for one thing:

Listen to me. Walk this way. It will go well with you.

We rarely refuse that voice outright. We simply cannot hear it over everything else — including, most of all, ourselves.

Last week the Scriptures kept returning to hands. The seven verses given to us this week return, again and again, to the mouth and the feet — to what we say and to where we walk — and they insist, with a persistence that is hard to shake off, that the two are connected. A guard over my mouth, so that I may not fall. Do not turn aside, or you may fall. If you had walked in the way of God. Every careless word.Obey my voice and walk in the way.

It is worth noticing how this week is framed. It began on 21 September, which in the Roman calendar is the feast of St Matthew — a tax collector who heard a two-word sentence, “Follow me,” and “got up and followed him” (Matthew 9:9). It ends today, on a Sunday when the Gospel read in Latin-rite parishes around the world is the parable of the two sons: one who said “I go, sir,” and did not go, and one who said “I will not,” and later changed his mind and went (Matthew 21:28–32).

A voice heard, and a road taken. A word spoken, and a road refused.

This is a Wake-up Call, and it is aimed at a particular kind of religious comfort — the comfort of having said the right things. Jeremiah preached this week’s anchor verse to a crowd who knew every correct phrase and repeated it with conviction. They were not short of words about God.

They were short of hearing.

The Passage

Jeremiah 7:23 (our anchor text this week)

Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be my people; walk only in the way that I command you, so that it may be well with you.

ജറെമിയാ 7 : 23

എന്‍റെ വാക്ക് അനുസരിക്കുവിന്‍; ഞാന്‍ നിങ്ങളുടെ ദൈവവും നിങ്ങള്‍ എന്‍റെ ജനവുമായിരിക്കും. ഞാന്‍ നിങ്ങളോടു കല്‍പിക്കുന്ന മാര്‍ഗത്തിലൂടെ ചരിക്കുവിന്‍; നിങ്ങള്‍ക്കു ശുഭമായിരിക്കും.

Six further verses accompany it through the week. We will not take them in the order of the calendar but in the order of the argument they make together. They show us what became of a people who did not hear; why they could not hear; what careless words do to a human being; whether anyone can guard their own mouth; how to wait without wandering off the road; and, finally, who carries us along it.

Biblical Context

A sermon preached in the gateway

Jeremiah is told to stand in the gate of the Temple and speak to everyone coming in to worship (7:2). The sermon that follows (7:1–15), together with the oracles gathered around it to the end of the chapter, is one of the most dangerous speeches in the Old Testament — and we know how dangerous, because the Bible tells the story twice. Chapter 26 narrates what appears to be the same event from the outside and gives it a date: “at the beginning of the reign of King Jehoiakim” (26:1), that is, around 609/608 BC.

That date is a wound. In 609 BC King Josiah — the reforming king who had purged the Temple and renewed the covenant — was killed at Megiddo by Pharaoh Neco of Egypt (2 Kings 23:29). His son Jehoahaz lasted three months before Neco deposed him and installed his brother Eliakim, renamed Jehoiakim, as an Egyptian vassal (23:31–35). The reform had died with the reformer. Judah was paying tribute, and the great powers of the age — Egypt in decline, Babylon rising — were closing in.

And yet Jerusalem felt safe. A century earlier, in 701 BC, the Assyrian king Sennacherib had besieged the city and withdrawn without taking it (2 Kings 18–19; Isaiah 36–37). Many scholars think that deliverance hardened, over the following generations, into a popular conviction that Zion could not fall: God lived here; therefore nothing could happen here. Whether or not anyone put it so baldly, Jeremiah’s sermon shows that something like it was in the air, compressed into a three-fold chant:

“This is the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD.” (7:4)

Jeremiah calls these “deceptive words” — in Hebrew divrei hasheqer, words of falsehood — and he says it twice (7:4, 8). The sermon then lays out the conditions on which God will let his people remain in the land: act justly with one another; stop oppressing the alien, the orphan and the widow; stop shedding innocent blood; stop following other gods (7:5–7). Then comes one of the sharpest sentences in the prophets: “Will you steal, murder, commit adultery, swear falsely… and then come and stand before me in this house, which is called by my name, and say, ‘We are safe!'” (7:9–10). Has this house become “a den of robbers” (7:11)? — the line Jesus would quote as he overturned tables in the same courts (Matthew 21:13). Go to Shiloh, God says, the old sanctuary north of Jerusalem where the ark had once rested, and look at what is left of it (7:12).

Our anchor verse belongs to a smaller unit further on (7:21–28), where the subject shifts from the Temple to the sacrifices offered in it. It opens with a piece of bitter irony — “Add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices, and eat the flesh” (7:21) — followed by a statement that has puzzled readers ever since:

“For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.” (7:22)

Then verse 23: “But this command I gave them: Obey my voice…”

How can Jeremiah — himself from a priestly family in Anathoth (1:1) — say that God never commanded sacrifice, when whole chapters of Exodus and Leviticus are devoted to it? Interpreters have answered in three main ways, and honesty requires setting them side by side:

  • Many read it as a Hebrew idiom of relative negation, in which “not this, but that” means “not this so much as that.” Hosea 6:6 uses the same pattern: “I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice.” On this reading Jeremiah is ranking, not abolishing.
  • Others point to the order of events at Sinai. Before any law of sacrifice is given, the covenant opens with a condition: “if you obey my voice and keep my covenant” (Exodus 19:5). The first thing God said at the mountain concerned his voice.
  • A number of critical scholars think Jeremiah reflects a tradition in which the wilderness covenant did not centre on sacrifice at all, and they point to Amos 5:25: “Did you bring to me sacrifices and offerings the forty years in the wilderness, O house of Israel?”

The readings differ on history. They agree on the point. Offerings without hearing are not what God asked for, and never were. Jeremiah is not an outsider mocking worship. He is a priest’s son telling worshippers that they have mistaken the envelope for the letter.

What happened next

The sermon was not received as a thoughtful contribution to public debate. Chapter 26 records that the priests, the prophets and the people seized Jeremiah and said, “You shall die!” (26:8). He survived because certain elders reminded the assembly that a century earlier Micah of Moresheth had prophesied the ruin of Jerusalem and King Hezekiah had not killed him for it (26:17–19) — a small reunion for readers of this series, who met Micah two weeks ago. A court official, Ahikam son of Shaphan, shielded him (26:24). Another prophet, Uriah son of Shemaiah, who preached the same message, was not so fortunate: he fled to Egypt, was brought back, and was executed by Jehoiakim (26:20–23).

Then the unheard word came true. The first deportation to Babylon followed in 597 BC. In 587/586 BC the Babylonian army burned the house that had been called by God’s name. The slogan did not hold.

Where the other six verses come from

Baruch 3:13 stands in the book that bears the name of Baruch son of Neriah, Jeremiah’s scribe and companion (Jeremiah 32:12; 36:4; 45:1). The book presents itself as written in Babylon after Jerusalem’s fall (Baruch 1:1–2). It is read as Scripture in the Catholic and Orthodox traditions; most Protestant Bibles place it among the Apocrypha. Most scholars regard it as a later composite work, probably from the second century BC, written in the name of the famous scribe according to a recognised literary convention of the period. It survives in Greek, and many scholars think at least its first half was translated from a Hebrew original now lost. Its structure is clear: an introduction (1:1–14), a long prayer of confession (1:15–3:8), a poem on wisdom (3:9–4:4), and a poem of consolation for Jerusalem (4:5–5:9). Our verse sits near the beginning of the wisdom poem, which opens with a deliberate echo of Israel’s great confession of faith: “Hear the commandments of life, O Israel; give ear, and learn wisdom!” (3:9).

Matthew 12:36 comes from a long confrontation in Matthew 12:22–37. Jesus heals a man who is blind and mute, “so that the one who had been mute could speak and see” (12:22). The crowds wonder aloud whether he is the Son of David. The Pharisees offer another explanation: “It is only by Beelzebul, the ruler of the demons, that this fellow casts out the demons” (12:24). Jesus answers with the image of a divided kingdom, the warning about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (12:31–32), the saying about a tree known by its fruit (12:33), and then a run of sayings about speech that culminates in our verse and the one after it: “for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned” (12:37). Earlier in the same chapter, in a dispute about the Sabbath, Jesus has already quoted Hosea: “If you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless” (12:7). Hold on to that verse; it ties Matthew 12 directly to Jeremiah 7. The Gospel’s traditional attribution to the apostle Matthew — whose feast opened this week — is ancient; modern scholars debate the question and generally date the Gospel to the later first century. Nothing in this study depends on the answer.

Tobit 3:15 belongs to one of the most humane books of the Old Testament. It is set among Israelites deported by Assyria to Nineveh in the eighth century BC, but was probably composed in the third or early second century BC. It was written in Aramaic or Hebrew — fragments of four Aramaic manuscripts and one Hebrew manuscript were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls — and survives complete in two main Greek forms, a shorter and a longer. Many scholars read it as an edifying narrative, a story told to teach, rather than a chronicle; its chronology is loose. It belongs to the Catholic and Orthodox canons, and its truth lies where the book itself places it: in what it teaches about prayer, providence, almsgiving, marriage and fidelity in a foreign land.

Chapter 3 is built with great care. On the same day, in two cities far apart, two people are wounded by words and pray to die. In Nineveh, the blind Tobit, after a bitter quarrel with his wife Anna, asks God to take his life, “because I have had to listen to undeserved insults” (3:6). In Ecbatana in Media, a young woman named Sarah is reproached by one of her father’s maids (3:7). The narrator then draws the two scenes together: “At that very moment, the prayers of both of them were heard in the glorious presence of God” (3:16), and the angel Raphael is sent to heal them both (3:17).

Sirach 22:27 and Sirach 2:7 come from the Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach — Ben Sira — a Jerusalem scribe and teacher writing around 190–180 BC, shortly before the crisis under Antiochus IV. His grandson translated the book into Greek in Egypt, having arrived there, as his prologue tells us, “in the thirty-eighth year of the reign of Euergetes” — that is, 132 BC. The Latin title Ecclesiasticus, “the church’s book,” reflects its long use in the Church for moral formation. It is read as Scripture in the Catholic and Orthodox traditions and placed among the Apocrypha by most Protestants. Much of the Hebrew original was rediscovered from 1896 onward in the Cairo Genizah, with further fragments from Qumran and Masada; but the Church has always read the book in its Greek and Latin forms, and it is the Greek that lies behind both of this week’s verses.

Chapter 2 is Ben Sira’s instruction to a beginner: “My child, when you come to serve the Lord, prepare yourself for testing” (2:1). Gold is tested in fire (2:5). Then comes a triple refrain — three consecutive verses each beginning “You who fear the Lord” (2:7–9) — of which ours is the first. The chapter ends by echoing the sentence of King David that we studied last week (1 Chronicles 21:13): “Let us fall into the hands of the Lord, but not into the hands of mortals; for equal to his majesty is his mercy” (2:18).

Sirach 22:27 is a hinge. It closes a long section of practical advice and opens a short prayer (22:27–23:6) in which Ben Sira asks God to guard first his lips and then his thoughts and desires. In that prayer he addresses God as “Lord, Father and Master of my life” (23:1) and “Lord, Father and God of my life”(23:4) — a personal address to God as Father that is rare in Jewish writing before the New Testament.

Psalm 68 is, by general agreement, one of the most difficult poems in the Psalter. It contains an unusual number of rare words, some found nowhere else in the Bible, and its structure has been read in very different ways; the American scholar W. F. Albright once proposed that it was not a single poem at all but a catalogue of the opening lines of older hymns. Most interpreters today hear in it a great procession: God marching from Sinai through the wilderness (68:7–8, echoing Judges 5:4–5), ascending to his sanctuary with captives in his train (68:17–18), and entering in solemn procession with singers, musicians and the tribes of Israel (68:24–27). Its opening line is the ancient cry raised whenever the ark set out: “Let God rise up, let his enemies be scattered” (68:1; compare Numbers 10:35). The Hebrew numbering runs one verse ahead of the English, so our verses are 68:20–21 in a Hebrew Bible.

Verse 18 — “You ascended the high mount, leading captives in your train and receiving gifts from people” — is applied by Paul to Christ’s ascension, in a form that says he gave gifts (Ephesians 4:8), a reading also found in the ancient Aramaic paraphrase of the Psalms. Our verses come immediately after that ascent, and they are a surprise. Having celebrated God’s triumph, the psalm turns to something far less spectacular: a God who carries his people day by day.

Lexical Notes

1. shim’u veqoli — “obey my voice” (Jeremiah 7:23)

שִׁמְעוּ בְקוֹלִי — literally, “hear in my voice.”

Biblical Hebrew has no separate, everyday verb meaning “obey.” The verb שָׁמַע (shama’) covers the whole range: to hear, to listen, to pay attention, to understand, to heed, to obey. English has to choose among these meanings; Hebrew does not. The construction shama’ be-qol, “to hear at the voice of,” is the standard idiom for heeding someone. God says of Abraham, “because you have obeyed my voice”(Genesis 22:18), and the Sinai covenant opens with “if you obey my voice” (Exodus 19:5). The same verb gives Israel its central prayer, the Shema: “Hear, O Israel” (Deuteronomy 6:4).

The consequence is simple and severe. In the Hebrew imagination there is almost no such thing as a hearing that stays in the ears. To hear and not to walk is, by this vocabulary, not to have heard.

Notice, too, the word God uses for what is to be heard: קוֹל (qol), voice — not “my law,” not “my text.” A voice is personal, living, addressed to someone. The covenant is presented as a conversation that is still going on. The Malayalam renders it എന്‍റെ വാക്ക് — my word — which keeps the same sense of something spoken.

And Jeremiah insists that the conversation is still going on. Twice in this chapter God says he has spoken to his people persistently (7:13) and sent his prophets “day after day” (7:25). The Hebrew idiom behind both is vivid — hashkem, rising early — and it is almost a signature of the book of Jeremiah: I rose early and spoke; I rose early and sent. God is pictured as someone who gets up before dawn to talk to his people.

The problem in Jeremiah 7 is not a silent God. It is a people who are always talking.

2. halakh and derekh — “walk” and “way” (Jeremiah 7:23; Baruch 3:13; Sirach 2:6–7)

הָלַךְ (halakh) means to walk or go; דֶּרֶךְ (derekh) means road, path, journey, and by extension a whole manner of life. Scripture pictures the moral life almost always as movement along a road; conduct is something you walk. Later Jewish tradition named its body of practical religious law halakhah — literally “the walking,” the way one goes. And the earliest name for the followers of Jesus, before they were called Christians, was simply “the Way” (Acts 9:2; 19:9, 23; 24:14) — a name that belongs to the one who said, “I am the way” (John 14:6).

Two details in Jeremiah 7:23 deserve attention.

First, the Hebrew says “walk in all the way that I command you” — בְּכָל־הַדֶּרֶךְ (bekhol-hadderekh). The NRSV, quoted here, renders it “walk only in the way,” which captures the exclusiveness; the Hebrew stresses completeness. Both arrive at the same demand: not the pleasant stretches, not most of the road — all of it. Keep that phrase in mind; it will reappear at the end of the week in a very different light.

Second, the verse closes with a refrain that runs through Deuteronomy: “so that it may be well with you” — לְמַעַן יִיטַב לָכֶם (lema’an yitav lakhem; compare Deuteronomy 5:16; 6:18). The command is framed as being for the hearer’s good, not as tribute paid to God. The way is not a toll road. It is the road home. The Malayalam says it with lovely simplicity: നിങ്ങള്‍ക്കു ശുഭമായിരിക്കും — it will be good for you.

3. ekklinō — “do not stray” (Sirach 2:7)

Ben Sira’s Greek is compact: anameinate to eleos autou kai mē ekklinēte, hina mē pesēte — “wait for his mercy, and do not turn aside, lest you fall.”

ἐκκλίνω (ekklinō) means to bend out of line, to swerve, to turn off the road. It is the verb the Greek Old Testament uses for Deuteronomy’s instruction not to turn aside “to the right or to the left”(Deuteronomy 5:32), and in the psalm Paul quotes in Romans: “All have turned aside” (Psalm 14:3; Romans 3:12). The Malayalam catches it exactly: വഴി തെറ്റരുത്‌ — do not lose the way.

It is paired with ἀναμένω (anamenō), to wait for, to stay on in expectation — the verb Paul uses of the Thessalonians who “wait for his Son from heaven” (1 Thessalonians 1:10).

Set the two verbs side by side and the picture becomes precise. A traveller has been told to wait at a certain place for help that is coming. The danger is not the waiting. The danger is the side-track that promises to shorten it. The fall, in Ben Sira’s line, comes from the swerve — not from the delay.

4. sphragis panourgos — “an effective seal” (Sirach 22:27)

The Greek reads tis dōsei epi stoma mou phylakēn kai epi tōn cheileōn mou sphragida panourgon — “who will give a guard over my mouth, and upon my lips a shrewd seal?” Three features matter.

The question is a wish. “Who will give…?” is the Greek form of a familiar Hebrew idiom, מִי יִתֵּן (mi yitten, literally “who will give?”), which means “O that…!” or “If only…!” It is the idiom behind the psalmist’s “O that I had wings like a dove!” (Psalm 55:6) and Job’s “O that my words were written down!” (Job 19:23). So Sirach 22:27 is not a rhetorical question expecting the answer “no one.” It is a sigh. The Malayalam translators felt this and rendered the verse as a longing conditional: if there had been a guard for my mouth and the seal of discernment on my lips, I would not have fallen.

A seal is not a gag. In the ancient world a seal — a carved stone or metal stamp pressed into clay or wax — was set on a jar, a document, a door, a tomb. It showed ownership, protected the contents and prevented tampering, and it could be broken only by someone with the authority to break it (compare Matthew 27:66; Revelation 5:1–5). A seal on the lips is not permanent silence. It is speech released only with authority, at the right time, by the right hand.

The adjective is double-edged. πανοῦργος (panourgos) can mean crafty in a bad sense — Paul uses it, with irony, of the charge that he had been “crafty” with the Corinthians (2 Corinthians 12:16) — but in the Greek wisdom books it can also mean shrewd, astute, prudent in a good sense (as in the Greek of Proverbs 13:1 and 28:2). Translations vary accordingly: “an effective seal” (NRSV, quoted here), “a seal of prudence,” and the Malayalam വിവേകത്തിന്റെ മുദ്ര, “the seal of discernment.” Ben Sira is not asking for less speech. He is asking for intelligent speech.

5. ‘amas and totsa’ot — “bears us up” and “escape” (Psalm 68:19–20)

The Hebrew of verse 19 reads barukh Adonai yom yom ya’amos-lanu — roughly, “Blessed be the Lord; day by day he bears a load for us,” or “he carries us.”

The verb עָמַס (‘amas) is a working word: to load a pack animal, to carry a burden. Translations divide over its direction. The NRSV has “who daily bears us up”; the NIV, “who daily bears our burdens”; the King James, reading it as God loading us, supplied words in italics: “who daily loadeth us with benefits.”A few commentators take it as “if someone lays a burden on us, God is our salvation.” The grammar allows more than one reading. The image of a load-bearer is common to all of them.

The most illuminating use of the verb is in Isaiah 46. The prophet watches the gods of Babylon being carted away on the backs of exhausted animals — “these things you carry are loaded as burdens on weary animals” (46:1) — and then turns to Israel: “Listen to me… who have been borne by me from your birth, carried from the womb; even to your old age I am he, even when you turn gray I will carry you… I will carry and will save” (46:3–4). The contrast is the whole of biblical religion in miniature: a god you have to carry, or a God who carries you.

Verse 20 ends with a word just as concrete: תּוֹצָאוֹת (totsa’ot), goings-out, exits, outlets. In Joshua it marks the point where a boundary line runs out at the sea (Joshua 15:4); in Proverbs it describes what flows out of the heart — “from it flow the springs of life” (Proverbs 4:23). In Psalm 68 it is the way out of death. To GOD, the Lord, belong the exits. Death is pictured as a place with doors, and the psalmist knows who holds them.

6. oneidismos — “reproach” (Tobit 3:15)

ὀνειδισμός (oneidismos) means reproach, taunting, public insult — words that attach shame to a name. The word and its related verb run through the whole of Tobit 3: they describe what Tobit heard (3:6) and what Sarah heard (3:7, 10, 15).

The New Testament reserves this word for something remarkable. Paul applies to Christ the line from Psalm 69: “The insults of those who insult you have fallen on me” (Romans 15:3; Psalm 69:9). Hebrews says Moses “considered abuse suffered for the Christ to be greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt” (11:26), and urges believers to “go to him outside the camp and bear the abuse he endured”(13:13). The word that nearly destroyed Sarah is the word the New Testament uses for what Christ chose to carry.

A textual note. The English given to us this week — “command that respect be shown to me and pity be taken upon me, and that I hear reproach no more” — follows the shorter Greek text of Tobit, as the RSV does. The longer Greek text, generally supported by the Qumran fragments and followed by several modern translations including the NRSV, reads differently at this point: roughly, “hear me in my disgrace.” Both preserve the heart of her prayer. And the Malayalam — എനിക്കു മാന്യത നല്‍കണമേ, “grant me dignity” — names exactly what the insults had taken from her.

7. rhēma argon — “careless word” (Matthew 12:36)

The Greek reads pan rhēma argon ho lalēsousin hoi anthrōpoi apodōsousin peri autou logon en hēmera kriseōs — “every idle word that people speak, they will render an account of it on the day of judgment.”

ἀργός (argos) is a contraction of a-ergos, without work. Its basic meaning is idle, inactive, unemployed, useless. Matthew uses it a few chapters later of the labourers standing idle in the marketplace (20:3, 6). James uses it of faith without works, which is argē — barren, doing nothing(James 2:20). A rhēma argon is, quite literally, a word that is not doing any work — or not doing the work that words are for. The Malayalam വ്യര്‍ഥ വാക്ക്, a futile word, sits very close to it.

Interpreters differ on how far to press this. Some read “careless” words as the trivial and thoughtless: chatter, flippancy, words spoken without attention. Others point out that the context is anything but trivial — the Pharisees have just called the work of God’s Spirit demonic — and read argos as words empty of truth and good, including the malicious and the false. Both readings are defensible, and the saying’s “every” seems deliberately to cover the whole range.

Then the verb: ἀποδώσουσιν λόγον (apodōsousin logon), they will render an account. It is the language of a steward’s audit — “give me an accounting of your management” (Luke 16:2). There is a small wordplay in the Greek: for every rhēma, every word spoken, a logos, a reckoning, is due. The Malayalam uses the plain language of the account-book: കണക്കു കൊടുക്കേണ്ടി വരും — you will have to give the account.

Reading the Passage Closely

Read Jeremiah 7:23 slowly, and in its place, and several things surface.

First, it is a quotation. “This command I gave them” — God is not issuing a new demand. He is reaching back to the day of the Exodus and repeating the first thing he said. The covenant had a voice before it had a building. Jeremiah is not a reformer inventing a more spiritual religion; he is a remembrancer, reminding a people what the original terms were.

Second, notice the order of the clauses. Obey my voice — and I will be your God, and you shall be my people — walk in the way — so that it may be well with you. Hearing comes first; well-being comes last; and in the middle, holding the whole sentence together, is a relationship. This is the covenant formula, the Bible’s most compact statement of what God is after: “I will be your God, and you shall be my people” (compare Leviticus 26:12; Jeremiah 31:33; Ezekiel 36:28). It will be heard for the last time in the final vision of Scripture: “they will be his peoples, and God himself will be with them” (Revelation 21:3).

What the verse does not do is imagine a people of God who do not listen. Hearing is not presented as a fee paid for the relationship. It is the shape the relationship takes. You cannot be someone’s people and never hear their voice.

Third, set verse 23 against verse 4, and a contest appears. The people have a sentence: the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD. God has a sentence: obey my voice.Their sentence is about God. His sentence is addressed to them.

And here is the uncomfortable part. Their slogan was true. It was the temple of the LORD. Every word of the chant was theologically correct. What made it “deceptive” was not its content but its function: it was being used as a charm, a sentence that reassured the speaker and asked nothing of his feet. Words can be accurate and still be false in what they are doing.

Fourth, look at what they did instead. The next verse describes it: “Yet they did not obey or incline their ear, but, in the stubbornness of their evil will, they walked in their own counsels, and looked backward rather than forward” (7:24). The Hebrew is starker still — they were backward and not forward. The alternative to walking in God’s way is not standing still. It is reverse. A people who believed themselves safely inside the Temple were, by God’s account, walking backwards.

Fifth, notice where the chapter ends. Its closing verdict returns to the voice and then goes straight to the mouth: “This is the nation that did not obey the voice of the LORD their God, and did not accept discipline; truth has perished; it is cut off from their lips” (7:28). The Hebrew word for truth there, ’emunah, means faithfulness, reliability — the quality of a word you can lean on. A people who stop hearing God end up unable to speak truly to one another. The ear and the mouth fail together.

Sixth — and here we must be careful — notice what the text does not say. It does not say that worship is worthless. Jeremiah elsewhere looks forward to a restored Jerusalem ringing with “the voices of those who sing, as they bring thank offerings to the house of the LORD” (33:11) — last week’s todah again. It does not say that obedience guarantees comfort. “That it may be well with you” is the language of covenant welfare, not a promise of an easy life; Jeremiah obeyed more completely than anyone in his generation and was beaten and put in the stocks (20:2), imprisoned (37:15), lowered into a muddy cistern (38:6) and finally carried off to Egypt against his will (43:6–7). And it does not say that it is too late. The whole point of repeating the ancient command at the Temple gate was that the people standing there could still hear it.

Scriptural Connections

Now watch the other six verses take their places around this command.

What became of the people who did not listen?

Baruch 3:13 — “If you had walked in the way of God, you would be living in peace forever.”

Read this verse immediately after Jeremiah 7:23 and it sounds like an echo returning from the far side of a disaster. Jeremiah said: walk in the way… that it may be well with you. Baruch says: if you had walked in the way… you would be living in peace. Same road. Same promise. The only thing that has changed is the grammar — from command to regret.

The book carries the name of a man who knew this story better than anyone. It was Baruch who wrote Jeremiah’s words on a scroll at the prophet’s dictation (Jeremiah 36:4). And it was that scroll which was later read aloud before King Jehoiakim — the same king at whose accession the Temple Sermon had been preached — while the prophet and his scribe were in hiding. It was winter; the king sat before a fire in a brazier; and each time three or four columns had been read, he cut them off with a knife and threw them into the fire, until the whole scroll was gone (36:22–23). The narrator adds a quiet, devastating line: those who heard “were not alarmed” (36:24).

It is the most literal picture in the Bible of what Jeremiah 7:24 means by “they did not incline their ear.”A king slicing up a voice and burning it to stay warm.

Baruch’s response is worth remembering too. He simply wrote it all out again (36:32).

The book of Baruch describes where that road led: “Why is it, O Israel, why is it that you are in the land of your enemies, that you are growing old in a foreign country?” (3:10). And it gives the reason: “You have forsaken the fountain of wisdom” (3:12) — an echo of Jeremiah 2:13, where God says his people “have forsaken me, the fountain of living water.”

Growing old in a foreign country. There are few truer descriptions of a life that took the side road. It is not always dramatic. Sometimes it is simply the slow discovery, at fifty or at seventy, that one has aged somewhere one never meant to live.

But notice what Scripture does with the grammar of regret, because it is not what we usually do with it. The contrary-to-fact if — if you had walked — appears again and again in the Bible, and startlingly often in the mouth of God. “If only they had such a mind as this, to fear me and to keep all my commandments always, so that it might go well with them” (Deuteronomy 5:29). “O that you had paid attention to my commandments! Then your prosperity would have been like a river” (Isaiah 48:18). “O that my people would listen to me, that Israel would walk in my ways!” (Psalm 81:13). And Jesus, weeping over the same city Jeremiah preached to: “If you, even you, had only recognized on this day the things that make for peace!” (Luke 19:42).

These are not accusations. They are laments. The Bible’s if only is the sound of God grieving, and grief is a form of love that has not given up.

That is why Baruch’s poem does not stop at regret. The very next verse turns to invitation: “Learn where there is wisdom… so that you may at the same time discern where there is length of days, and life, where there is light for the eyes, and peace” (3:14). And the poem closes not in mourning but in something close to joy: “Happy are we, O Israel, for we know what is pleasing to God” (4:4). In Scripture, if you had is spoken so that you still can may be heard.

ബാറൂക്ക്‌ 3 : 13

ദൈവത്തിന്റെ മാര്‍ഗത്തില്‍ ചരിച്ചിരുന്നെങ്കില്‍ നീ എന്നേക്കും സമാധാനത്തില്‍ വസിക്കുമായിരുന്നു.

Why could they not hear?

Matthew 12:36 — “I tell you, on the day of judgment you will have to give an account for every careless word you utter.”

Matthew 12 opens its long confrontation with a quiet miracle that is easy to overlook. A man is brought to Jesus who is both blind and mute — he can neither see nor speak — and Jesus heals him “so that the one who had been mute could speak and see” (12:22). A man who had no words is given words.

Then people who have always had words use them. The Pharisees watch God’s Spirit set a human being free, and they say: this is the work of the prince of demons (12:24). The man who had been mute is now speaking. The men who have never been mute are misnaming God.

That is the setting of this week’s verse, and it matters, because it means the “careless word” of 12:36 cannot be reduced to small talk. Jesus has just been on the receiving end of a sentence that was quick, clever and socially useful — it explained away an inconvenient miracle — and utterly false. His response goes beneath the tongue: “You brood of vipers! How can you speak good things, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” (12:34). Words are not the root. They are the fruit (12:33). What comes out of the mouth is the heart made audible.

This is also why the following verse — “by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned” (12:37) — is not a scheme of salvation by careful phrasing. Jesus is saying that words are evidence. On the day of judgment, the record of what we said will testify to what we were.

Now return to the Temple gate. “The temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD” was, in the precise sense of Matthew 12:36, an argos word — a word that did no work. It was true, it was pious, and it accomplished nothing except the comfort of the one who said it. The most dangerous idle words are not the vulgar ones. They are the devout ones, because they feel like faithfulness.

And recall the verse from earlier in the same chapter: “If you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless” (12:7). There is Jeremiah 7:22–23 again, in Hosea’s words, on the lips of Jesus. There is Baruch’s grammar again: if you had known. And there, stated plainly, is the link between the week’s two threads. People who do not hear what God desires end up condemning the guiltless — with their words.

James, of all the New Testament writers the most preoccupied with the tongue, draws the lesson without softening it: “How great a forest is set ablaze by a small fire! And the tongue is a fire” (James 3:5–6). “From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. My brothers and sisters, this ought not to be so” (3:10).

മത്തായി 12 : 36

ഞാന്‍ നിങ്ങളോടു പറയുന്നു: മനുഷ്യര്‍ പറയുന്ന ഓരോ വ്യര്‍ഥ വാക്കിനും വിധി ദിവസത്തില്‍ കണക്കു കൊടുക്കേണ്ടി വരും.

What do careless words do to a person?

Tobit 3:15 — “But if it be not pleasing to you to take my life, command that respect be shown to me and pity be taken upon me, and that I hear reproach no more.”

The book of Tobit shows us, without any theory at all, what words can do.

Begin in Nineveh. Tobit, a man known for his generosity to the poor and his courage in burying the dead, has been blinded, and his wife Anna has gone out to work weaving cloth to keep the household alive. One day her employers give her a young goat in addition to her wages. Tobit hears it bleating and, in his humiliation, accuses her of stealing it. She protests; he refuses to believe her; and she answers him with the one sentence she knows will hurt most — in effect, where are all your famous acts of charity now? (2:11–14). Tobit, stung, prays to die.

It is worth noticing that the book does not flatter its hero. The first careless word in this story is his.

Now to Ecbatana. Sarah has been married seven times, and on each wedding night her husband has died — killed, the narrator tells us, by a demon (3:8). The household is raw with grief and fear. The maid’s own words suggest that Sarah had struck or punished the servants; whatever had happened, the maid turns on her: “You are the one who kills your husbands!… Why do you beat us? Because your husbands are dead? Go with them! May we never see a son or daughter of yours!” (3:8–9).

Look at what that sentence does. It takes a catastrophe Sarah did not cause and names her as its author. In its own small way it is the same kind of word as Matthew 12:24 — an evil power’s work misattributed, and a person condemned by the misnaming. And it goes straight for her future: no children, no name, no place.

The words find their mark. Sarah weeps, goes up to her father’s upper room, and intends to end her life (3:10).

Then, in the depth of her anguish, she stops — and the reason she stops is love. My father has only me,she thinks. If I do this, they will reproach him too, and I will bring his old age down in sorrow to the grave (3:10). She does not suddenly feel better. She simply cannot do that to him. So she does the one other thing she can think of. She goes to the window, and she prays.

Her prayer is completely honest. She tells God she wishes to die. She sets out her situation with painful clarity: she is her father’s only child; there is no near kinsman left for her to marry; seven husbands are dead. Why should I live? And then, in the second half of the verse — the half given to us this week — something turns. But if it is not your will to take my life… then give me respect. Have pity on me. Let me hear reproach no more.

That is the heart of it. What Sarah wanted, underneath the wish to die, was for the words to stop. She wanted her name back.

Scripture does not treat such prayer as a failure of faith. Moses asked God to take his life (Numbers 11:15). Elijah lay down under a broom tree and asked to die (1 Kings 19:4). Job cursed the day he was born (Job 3). None of them was cast off for praying it. Each was met.

And so was Sarah — faster than she could have imagined. “At that very moment, the prayers of both of them were heard in the glorious presence of God” (3:16). Tobit in Nineveh, Sarah in Ecbatana: two wounded people in two cities, heard in the same instant. The angel Raphael — whose name means God heals — is sent to them both (3:17).

And here is the quiet irony the storyteller has planted. Sarah prayed that there was no near kinsman for her to marry. Her answer was already being set in motion: within days, Tobit’s son Tobias — her kinsman, the one entitled to marry her before any other (3:17; 6:11–12) — would be on the road towards her, with an angel walking beside him.

The Church keeps the feast of the Archangels Michael, Gabriel and Raphael this Tuesday, 29 September. It is a good week to remember that the angel of healing was first sent to two people nearly destroyed by words, and that his healing work was done not with a thunderbolt but by accompanying a young man on a long journey.

A word for anyone who has reached Sarah’s upper room. If the words spoken to you or about you have brought you to the point of wanting to end your life, please do what Sarah did next, and speak — to God, and also, today, to someone who can be with you: a friend, a family member, a priest, a doctor. In India you can call Tele-MANAS on 14416, free and at any hour; wherever you are in the world, your local crisis line exists for exactly this moment. You are not the sentence that was spoken over you.

തോബിത്‌ 3 : 15

ഞാന്‍ ജീവിക്കണമെന്നാണ്‌ അവിടുത്തെ ഹിതമെങ്കില്‍ എന്നെ കാരുണ്യപൂര്‍വം കടാക്‌ഷിക്കേണമേ! ഇനി അധിക്‌ഷേപങ്ങള്‍ കേള്‍ക്കാന്‍ ഇടവരാത്ത വിധം എനിക്കു മാന്യത നല്‍കണമേ!

Can anyone guard their own mouth?

Sirach 22:27 — “Who will set a guard over my mouth and an effective seal upon my lips, so that I may not fall because of them and my tongue may not destroy me?”

If anyone in the ancient world was qualified to guard his own mouth, it was Ben Sira. He was a professional teacher of wise speech, and his book is full of hard-won counsel on the subject: “Honor and dishonor come from speaking, and the tongue of mortals may be their downfall” (5:13). “The wise remain silent until the right moment” (20:7). “Many have fallen by the edge of the sword, but not as many as have fallen because of the tongue” (28:18).

And yet here, at the end of a chapter of practical advice, the expert stops advising and starts praying. O that someone would set a guard over my mouth. He knows the rules better than anyone, and he knows that knowing them has not been enough.

That confession is worth more than a shelf of communication techniques. Speech is the one area of life where almost everyone believes they are more careful than they are. Ben Sira, who had spent a lifetime on the subject, did not believe that about himself.

Then watch where the prayer goes. The next verse answers the sigh by naming the One who can do what he cannot: “O Lord, Father and Master of my life, do not abandon me to their designs, and do not let me fall because of them!” (23:1). And the prayer moves at once from the lips to the thoughts and desires that feed them (23:2–6). Ben Sira has grasped, two centuries before Matthew 12:34, that you cannot guard the mouth without guarding what flows into it.

The psalmist had prayed the same way: “Set a guard over my mouth, O LORD; keep watch over the door of my lips” (Psalm 141:3). The mouth has a door. The only question is who keeps it.

Notice, finally, how Ben Sira names the danger: so that I may not fall because of them, and my tongue may not destroy me. The tongue is the one weapon that always points in two directions at once. It wounds its target, and it wounds its owner. Tobit learned that in his own house. James knew it too: the tongue “stains the whole body” (James 3:6).

And with that, the week’s other recurring word arrives: fall.

പ്രഭാഷകന്‍ 22 : 27

എന്‍റെ വായ്ക്ക് കാവല്‍കാരനും എന്‍റെ ചുണ്ടുകളില്‍ വിവേകത്തിന്‍റെ മുദ്രയും ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നെങ്കില്‍, ഞാന്‍ വീഴുകയോ നാവു മൂലം നശിക്കുകയോ ചെയ്യുകയില്ലായിരുന്നു.

How do I wait without falling?

Sirach 2:7 — “You who fear the Lord, wait for his mercy; do not stray, or else you may fall.”

Ben Sira is writing to a beginner. “My child, when you come to serve the Lord, prepare yourself for testing” (2:1). There will be humiliation and delay; gold is tested in fire (2:5). Then, in three consecutive verses, each beginning “You who fear the Lord,” he tells the beginner what to do: wait for his mercy (2:7), trust him (2:8), hope for good things (2:9).

Waiting comes first. And the warning attached to it is exact: do not turn aside, or you may fall.

Why would a person waiting for God be tempted to turn aside? Because waiting is the most exposed position in the spiritual life. It is where every shortcut makes its offer. A few verses later Ben Sira names the one who takes the offer: “Woe to timid hearts and to slack hands, and to the sinner who walks a double path!” (2:12). The Greek pictures a man trying to walk along two tracks at once. Last week we met James’s word for him — the dipsychos, the two-souled person facing two directions.

Jeremiah’s generation knew exactly what the side-roads looked like. Faced with Babylon, they did not wait on God; they went looking for Egypt. Jeremiah mocked them for it: “How lightly you gad about, changing your ways! You shall be put to shame by Egypt as you were put to shame by Assyria”(Jeremiah 2:36). The political shortcut was the swerve, and the swerve was the fall.

The remedy Ben Sira offers is memory: “Consider the generations of old and see: has anyone trusted in the Lord and been disappointed?” (2:10). And just before our verse, a line that joins his chapter to this week’s anchor: “Trust in him, and he will help you; make your ways straight, and hope in him” (2:6). Ways, again.

Then, at the very end of the chapter, Ben Sira does something that binds this week to the last. He echoes the sentence of King David we studied last week: “Let us fall into the hands of the Lord, but not into the hands of mortals; for equal to his majesty is his mercy” (2:18). It is as though he says: if you must fall, fall there. In Scripture, the only safe way to fall is into his hands.

പ്രഭാഷകന്‍ 2 : 7

കര്‍ത്താവിന്റെ ഭക്‌തരേ, അവിടുത്തെ കരുണയ്‌ക്കു വേണ്ടി കാത്തിരിക്കുവിന്‍; വീഴാതിരിക്കാന്‍ വഴി തെറ്റരുത്‌.

And who carries us along the road?

Psalm 68:19–20 — “Blessed be the Lord, who daily bears us up; God is our salvation. Our God is a God of salvation, and to GOD, the Lord, belongs escape from death.”

After a week full of warnings — the road not taken, the careless word, the reproach, the unguarded mouth, the swerve and the fall — the Psalter gives us a doxology. It stands exactly where it is needed.

Everything else this week has asked something of us: hear, walk, wait, guard, account. Psalm 68 tells us what God does while we try. He carries. Yom yom — day by day. Not once, in a single dramatic rescue, but daily, the way a load-bearer carries a load: without ceremony, every morning, again.

The word fall has been shadowing us all week. Here is its opposite. Blessed be the Lord, who daily bears us up.

The verse also quietly corrects a misunderstanding that a week like this might produce. Jeremiah 7:23 says walk in all the way. It would be easy to hear that as a solitary march — the believer toiling up the road under the weight of commands. But Deuteronomy, the book behind so much of Jeremiah’s language, remembers the wilderness journey differently: “the LORD your God carried you, just as one carries a child, all the way that you traveled until you reached this place” (Deuteronomy 1:31). The Hebrew there is the same phrase as in Jeremiah 7:23: bekhol-hadderekh, in all the way.

God asks his people to walk all the way. He also carries them all the way. The two sentences are not in tension. They describe the same journey from its two ends.

Then verse 20: to GOD, the Lord, belong the exits from death. Christian readers have never been able to hear that line without thinking of the One who stood on the far side of death and said, “I was dead, and see, I am alive forever and ever; and I have the keys of Death and of Hades” (Revelation 1:18). The letter to the Hebrews says Christ came to “free those who all their lives were held in slavery by the fear of death” (Hebrews 2:15). The doors are in his hand. And it is a fine piece of placement that the verse Paul applies to Christ’s ascension (68:18) is followed at once by a blessing on the God who carries his people daily. The one who ascended is the one who carries.

After verse 19 the psalm writes Selah — a word whose precise meaning is uncertain, but which most likely marks a pause. It is the right instruction. Stop. Let yourself be carried.

സങ്കീര്‍ത്തനങ്ങള്‍ 68 : 19-20

അനുദിനം നമ്മെ താങ്ങുന്ന കര്‍ത്താവു വാഴ്‌ത്തപ്പെടട്ടെ! ദൈവമാണു നമ്മുടെ രക്‌ഷ. നമ്മുടെ ദൈവം രക്‌ഷയുടെ ദൈവമാണ്‌, മരണത്തില്‍ നിന്നുള്ള മോചനം ദൈവമായ കര്‍ത്താവാണു നല്‍കുന്നത്‌.

Interpretive Insights

1. In Scripture, hearing is not the first step towards obedience. It is obedience.

We have quietly separated hearing from doing, and in the gap we have built a religion of information. Most believers today hear more Scripture, more preaching and more religious commentary than any generation before them. By Jeremiah’s vocabulary, much of it has not yet been heard, because it has not yet reached the feet. The people at the Temple gate were not short of sermons. They had simply learned to hear without walking — which, in Hebrew, is not hearing at all.

2. Religious words can be true and still be careless.

The Temple slogan was correct in every syllable. What made it deceptive was the work it was being given: to reassure, to settle, to close the question. This is the insight easiest to miss and hardest to hear. An argos word is not necessarily a false word. It may be a true word that is doing nothing — or doing only the work of protecting the speaker from the voice of God.

3. The mouth and the feet belong to one system.

This week’s verses will not let us separate them. Ben Sira fears falling through the mouth (22:27) and falling through the swerve (2:7). Jeremiah’s hearers chanted a slogan and walked backwards (7:4, 24), and the chapter closes with truth cut off from their lips (7:28). Proverbs lays out the whole anatomy in four verses: “Keep your heart with all vigilance… Put away from you crooked speech… Let your eyes look directly forward… Keep straight the path of your feet” (Proverbs 4:23–26). Heart, mouth, eyes, feet. A life goes where its words go, and its words come from where its heart has been.

4. God treats wounding words as real harm — and wounded prayers as real prayer.

Scripture never tells Sarah that words cannot hurt her. It records her grief, her temptation, her honesty and her request, and then it says that her prayer was heard in the glorious presence of God. The Bible has room for prayers that begin with I want to die, provided they are prayed to God. What Sarah did with her pain — carried it to the window and spoke it aloud — is precisely what made it the beginning of her healing rather than the end of her story.

5. The “if only” of Scripture is an invitation, not a sentence.

Baruch 3:13 could be read as a closed door: you did not walk, so here you are. But the Bible’s pattern forbids that reading. Its most painful conditionals are spoken by God, in grief, and they are always followed by a way back. If you had walked is the voice of someone who still wants you on the road.

6. The God who commands the road carries the traveller.

The week’s final verse keeps all the others from becoming a burden. Jeremiah’s walk in all the way and Deuteronomy’s he carried you all the way are two halves of one covenant. Obedience in Scripture is never the solitary achievement of a strong walker. It is the walk of a child who is carried when the road is too long.

The Central Tension

Here is what this week’s Scriptures ask us to confront.

We would rather talk about God than listen to him.

Talking has great advantages. It keeps us in control. We choose the words, frame the story, reach the conclusion. We can talk about God at length without going anywhere at all. A slogan is portable, repeatable and flattering; it can be said at the gate of any temple and it costs the speaker nothing.

Listening — listening in the Hebrew sense — hands the direction of our lives to someone else. It asks something of the feet.

So we fill the silence. With prayers that are entirely speech. With conversations about faith that never arrive at a decision. With commentary, forwarding, explanation, defence. Much of it is true. Some of it is beautiful. And a great deal of it is argos — doing no work except keeping the voice of God at a comfortable distance.

Meanwhile the roads are being laid. Our words are laying roads under other people’s feet, as the maid’s words laid one under Sarah’s. Other people’s words have laid roads under ours. And through all that traffic, one voice has been speaking since before dawn, asking to be heard, promising that its road leads somewhere good.

So the question this week is not do you know what God has said? Almost everyone reading this could answer that.

It is far more personal:

Whose voice has actually been deciding which way you walk — and when did you last stop talking long enough for God’s voice to change your direction?

What This Means for Us Today

In the family. Tobit’s household and Raguel’s household were both good homes, full of faith, and both were nearly broken by sentences spoken in pain. Most families are. The labels we give at the dinner table — the difficult one, the clever one, the one who always forgets — become roads our children and siblings walk for decades. So does the careless remark in the family group on the phone, which is read by twenty people and forgotten by none of them. Jeremiah 7:23 and Matthew 12:36 together suggest a simple family discipline: speak at home as someone who will one day have to account for the roads you laid there.

In professional life, especially where words carry authority. Anyone who has drafted a statute, a judgment, a contract or an official order knows that a single word — shall or may, and or or — can change the lives of thousands. The same professionals can be remarkably careless in corridors: the offhand verdict on a junior colleague, the reference letter written in a hurry, the remark in a meeting that follows someone for years. Matthew 12:36 uses the language of the audit. The file note and the corridor remark are both on the record somewhere.

In reputation, and online. The maid’s sentence — you are the one who… — is the grammar of every public shaming. We now have instruments for oneidismos on a scale the ancient world could not have imagined, and the person reproached is usually not in the room. Before you post or forward, try Matthew 12:36’s test: is this a word that does good work — for truth, for justice, for someone’s healing — or an argos word? And try Sarah’s test: would I say it in front of that person’s father?

In the parish and in religious talk. Every Christian community has its slogans. God will provide. I am a practising Catholic. I have already forgiven him. Everything happens for a reason. Some are true; some are half-true; all can be used to close a matter rather than to open a road. Jeremiah’s sermon was addressed to worshippers at the door. It is addressed to us at ours.

In seasons of waiting. A diagnosis awaited. A job application. A case pending in court. A child’s marriage. A visa. A promotion that keeps not coming. Sirach 2:7 is written for exactly these seasons, because they are when the side-roads appear: the small dishonesty that would speed things up, the influential contact who will expect something in return, and the people who make a living selling shortcuts to the desperate — the guaranteed remedy, the special ritual, the man who knows a man. The fall, Ben Sira warns, comes from the swerve. It is worth deciding in advance which roads you will not take.

In ageing. Baruch speaks of growing old in a foreign country; Isaiah answers, even when you turn gray I will carry you (46:4). Both are true, and the second is God’s reply to the first. The later years are often when the if only arrives — the road not taken, the word that should not have been said, the reconciliation that did not happen. Scripture’s if only is always an invitation. It is not too late to walk a little way in the right direction, and it is never too late to be carried.

In the voice inside your head. Many of us carry an inner narrator that is really a recording of someone else’s careless sentence, replayed for years until it sounds like our own conclusion. Sarah very nearly believed the maid. Test the voice that tells you what you are. If it sounds like the maid in Ecbatana, it is not the voice of God.

In prayer. There is an old inversion of Samuel’s prayer that describes most of us rather well: “Listen, Lord, for your servant is speaking.” Jeremiah 7:23 invites the original order — “Speak, for your servant is listening” (1 Samuel 3:10). Prayer that begins with hearing will, sooner or later, ask something of your feet. That is how you will know it was heard.

A Rise & Inspire Moment

A slogan is a word that asks nothing of your feet.

The crowd at the Temple gate had one: the temple of the LORD. The second son in this Sunday’s parable had one: “I go, sir.” Both were perfectly good sentences. Neither one moved anybody anywhere.

God’s voice never works that way. Every time it speaks in Scripture, somebody moves. “Go from your country” — and Abraham went (Genesis 12:1–4). “Follow me” — and Matthew got up from his tax booth. Even Sarah’s answer, when it came, came walking along a road towards her.

When God speaks, someone walks.

So here is a test you can carry all week. If what you call your faith has never once changed the direction of your feet, it may be a slogan.

Listen until something is asked of your feet. Then you will know you have heard.

Living the Passage This Week

1. Keep a one-day ledger of your words. Matthew 12:36 speaks the language of accounts, so take it literally for a single day. Choose one day this week. That night, write down three things you said that day that did no good work — careless, cutting, idle, or simply empty — and one thing you said that did real good. No self-punishment; this is an audit, not a trial. The next day, repair one of the three.

2. Pray five minutes before you speak. Read Jeremiah 7:23 aloud once. Then set a timer for five minutes and do not say anything to God at all — no requests, no explanations. When the time is up, ask only one question: “Where are you asking my feet to go this week?” Test whatever comes against the plain commands of the passage itself: justice for one another, care for the stranger, the orphan and the widow, no innocent blood, no other gods (Jeremiah 7:5–6). If it fits, do it before Friday.

3. Retire one slogan. Identify one religious or reassuring phrase you use to close a matter rather than to act on it — “God will take care of it,” “I’ve forgiven him,” “I’ll pray about it.” This week, either make it true with a specific action, or stop saying it. Be the first son in the parable: let your feet correct your words.

4. Give back someone’s dignity. Sarah asked God for respect and an end to reproach. Think of one person you have labelled — at home, at work, in your parish — whether aloud or only in your head. Do the reverse of what the maid did: say one true, honouring sentence to them or about them, in the same company where the label was spoken. If the reproach was public, let the respect be public too.

5. Name your waiting, and your side-road. Write down, in one line, what you are waiting for from God. Underneath it, write the shortcut you are most tempted by. Then, each morning this week, before you look at your phone, pray Psalm 68:19 slowly: “Blessed be the Lord, who daily bears us up.” You are not being asked to carry the whole wait. Only today — and even today, you are being carried.

Questions for Personal Reflection

  1. What does Jeremiah 7:23 actually ask for, and in what order? Read it again and notice what stands in the middle of the verse, between the hearing and the walking.
  2. Whose sentence have I been walking along for years? Who spoke it, and did God ever say it?
  3. What slogan do I use to feel safe while my feet go their own way? Where am I saying “I go, sir”and not going?
  4. Whose road have my words been laying? Is there someone walking, even now, along a sentence I spoke carelessly — and what would it take to change its direction?
  5. Where is God’s voice asking my feet to go this week, and on what day will I go?

Prayerful Response

God who rises early to speak,

You have been talking to me for a long time, and I have been talking over you. I have said the right things about you — in church, at table, to myself — and called it listening.

Forgive the words I have spoken that did no good work: the careless ones, the clever ones, and the true ones I used as charms. Forgive the roads my sentences have laid under other people’s feet. Where I have shamed anyone, give them back their dignity — and let me be the one who gives it.

I do not know how to guard my own mouth. Set the guard yourself. Put your seal on my lips, and open them only when there is something worth releasing.

Teach me to wait for your mercy without wandering off in search of a shorter road. And where I have already wandered, let your if only reach me as an invitation and not a verdict.

Blessed are you, who daily bear us up. Thank you for every mile you carried me when I thought I was walking alone.

Speak now, and let me hear you with my feet. I do not ask to see the whole way. I ask only to be carried through today.

Through Christ our Lord, the Word who walked the road to the end. Amen.

Key Takeaway

Listen until the voice asks something of your feet — then walk, because the One who calls you to the road carries you all the way.

Closing

This week began with a tax collector and ends with two sons.

Matthew heard two words — “Follow me” — and his feet answered before his mouth did. The two sons in this Sunday’s Gospel did it the other way round. One had a perfect sentence and went nowhere. The other said entirely the wrong thing — “I will not” — and then, the text says, changed his mind and went.

There is great mercy in that parable. The Gospel does not ask which son had the better sentence. It asks which one did the will of his father. And it tells us that the son who said the wrong thing still had time to walk the right way.

So do, this week, what Jeremiah’s hearers would not. Say a little less. Listen a little longer. Let your words be fewer and truer, and watch whose roads they are laying. And when you hear something that asks something of your feet — however small, however inconvenient — get up from the booth.

He has been rising early to speak for a very long time.

Tomorrow morning, rise early to listen.

Which passage of Scripture would you like us to study together in a future Sunday Series? Tell us — the passages our readers are wrestling with are usually the ones worth a whole Sunday.

Rise & Inspire — Sunday Bible Series Depth over speed. Understanding over volume. Formation over information.

Written by John Britto Kurusumuthu.

The verses shared each morning by His Excellency, Rt. Rev. Dr. Selvister Ponnumuthan, Bishop of the Diocese of Punalur, are collected over seven days. These seven verses together form the basis for the weekly Sunday Bible Series.

© 2026 Rise & Inspire.

Website: Home | Blog | About Us | Contact| Resources

Word Count:12939

 Are the Best Life Hacks Really Shortcuts?

What are some life hacks that you practice?

View all responses

Confession: my best life hacks are mildly annoying. Each one costs me a minute today and saves me an hour of searching, worrying and apologising tomorrow. Curious which five inconveniences I swear by? They are waiting on the blog.

My Best Life Hacks Make Life Slightly Harder

A life hack, as the internet sells it, is a clever way to skip a step. Peel the garlic by shaking it in a jar; fold the shirt in two seconds. Save time, money, effort and stress. The promise is always subtraction.

Yet when I list the small practices that have genuinely improved my days, I notice something odd. Almost every one of them adds a little effort rather than removing it. They do not skip a step. They insert one, deliberately and early, so that I am spared many steps later.

That, I have come to believe, is what a real life hack is. It is not a shortcut but a small inconvenience chosen in advance. Here are five I practise.

1. A fixed place for everyday things

My keys, spectacles and pen each have a home. Returning them there costs something every time, especially at the end of a tiring day when it would be easier to drop them anywhere. But that small discipline has nearly abolished one of life’s most pointless activities: searching. The friction is paid in seconds; the saving is paid in calm.

2. Writing things down

Trusting memory feels faster. It is not. A task held in the head does not sit quietly; it keeps tapping the shoulder. Writing it down takes a moment longer, but a written list does more than organise the day. It gives the mind permission to stop remembering everything and start thinking about something.

3. Doing the small task at once

A two-minute reply, a bill to file, a call to return. Postponing each seems harmless, but small tasks do not stay small once they gather. A pile of trivial things weighs far more than the sum of its parts. So I do the small thing immediately, even when I would rather not. The reluctance lasts a minute. The relief lasts the day.

4. Taking a moment before responding

This is the hardest of the five, and the most valuable. When a message or a remark irritates me, I let it wait before answering. Most irritations lose their heat within the hour. The reply I would have sent in the first minute is rarely one I would still defend by evening. Centuries ago, the Tamil poet Avvaiyar compressed this whole practice into two words: “Aaruvathu sinam”, let anger cool. [1]

5. Saying no

Agreeing is the easy path. Refusing costs a moment of awkwardness, perhaps a flicker of disappointment on someone’s face. But every unconsidered yes is a loan drawn against my future time, and the interest is steep. A courteous no, given early, is kinder to both sides than a reluctant yes honoured badly.

Old counsel, new name

None of this is new. Aesop’s tortoise did not win by cleverness; it simply kept going while the hare, sure of its speed, lay down for a nap. The Book of Proverbs sends the idle to study the ant, which gathers its food in summer though no one compels it. A saying often associated with Zen observes that before enlightenment one chops wood and carries water, and after enlightenment one chops wood and carries water. A well-known hadith advises tying the camel first, and then trusting in God. Across these traditions the counsel is the same: attend to the small thing now, and the larger things grow lighter.

A fair objection

Not every shortcut is a vice. The washing machine, the calendar reminder and the recipe that halves the cooking time are gifts. Refusing them out of pride would be its own kind of foolishness. The question I ask is simple: does this shortcut remove drudgery, or does it remove attention? The first deserves a welcome. The second usually returns later, carrying a bill.

What a life hack really saves

A clever hack saves a few minutes. A good habit shapes the person who spends them. None of my practices is ingenious; a child could follow any of them. Their value lies in choosing a small inconvenience early, so that life does not hand me a larger one later.

Perhaps that is the only life hack worth passing on: pay the small price now, willingly, before a bigger one arrives unasked.

Note

[1] The Aathichoodi is a collection of single-line moral maxims in Tamil, traditionally attributed to the poet Avvaiyar. Its lines follow the order of the Tamil alphabet and have been taught to children for generations. “Aaruvathu sinam”, its second line, may be rendered as “anger is what should subside”.

John Britto Kurusumuthu

Rise & Inspire · riseandinspire.co.in

In response to the WordPress Daily Writing Prompt — 26 September 2026

© 2026 Rise&Inspire. All Rights Reserved.

Website: Home | Blog | About Us | Contact| Resources

Word Count:835

Does Money Really Bring Peace of Mind?

Tamil:

“பணம் நிம்மதி தராது என்று எந்த ஏழையும் சொன்னதில்லை.

நிம்மதி தராத அந்த பணத்தை இழக்க எந்த பணக்காரனும் தயாராக இல்லை.”

English:

“No poor person has ever said that money does not bring peace of mind.

Yet no rich person is willing to lose the money that supposedly does not bring peace of mind.”

Category: Motivational Quotes

This Tamil quote by the famous Tamil poet Kannadasan uses humour, irony, and a touch of truth to make us think about our complicated relationship with money.

At first glance, it appears contradictory. If money cannot guarantee happiness or peace, why do we constantly strive to earn more? And if money is so important, why do wealthy people sometimes say that money cannot buy happiness?

The answer lies somewhere between the two.

Money Matters—But It Is Not Everything

Money cannot buy every form of happiness. It cannot guarantee genuine friendship, good health, inner contentment, family harmony, or a peaceful mind.

But it would also be unrealistic to pretend that money does not matter.

Money can provide security.

It can pay for food, shelter, education, healthcare and other necessities. It can reduce the anxiety that comes from unpaid bills and financial uncertainty. For someone struggling to meet basic needs, having enough money can genuinely bring a sense of relief and stability.

So, saying “money doesn’t matter” is easy when our basic needs are already met.

The Irony of Wealth

The second part of the quote turns the mirror toward those who have money.

If money supposedly cannot bring peace, why are we so afraid of losing it?

Sometimes the pursuit of money becomes endless. We earn more, accumulate more, protect more—and then worry about losing what we have accumulated.

The irony is that money can provide security while the fear of losing money can create insecurity.

That is an important distinction.

The problem may not be money itself. The problem can be our attachment to it.

How Much Is Enough?

Perhaps the more meaningful question is not:

“How much money do I need to be happy?”

but:

“How much is enough for me to live responsibly and peacefully?”

There is nothing wrong with wanting financial stability. There is nothing wrong with earning well, saving for the future, or providing a comfortable life for our family.

But when having more becomes more important than living well, we may gradually exchange peace for possessions.

A person can own many things and still live in fear.

Another person may own much less and still experience gratitude, meaningful relationships and inner contentment.

Money Is a Tool, Not a Master

Perhaps the wisdom hidden in this humorous quote is simple:

Money is valuable when we control it; it becomes a burden when it controls us.

We should earn it honestly, use it wisely, save responsibly and share when we can. But we should not measure our entire life by the size of our bank balance.

After all, wealth can purchase comfort, but peace of mind ultimately depends on how we relate to what we possess.

The goal is not to reject money.

The goal is to ensure that money serves our life rather than our life becoming a servant of money.

A Thought to Carry With You

The Tamil quote makes us smile because it exposes a contradiction that many of us recognise.

The poor may dream of the security that money can provide.

The rich may fear losing the security they have accumulated.

And somewhere between those two experiences lies an important life lesson:

Earn enough to live with dignity.

Save enough to face tomorrow.

Enjoy what you have today.

And never allow the pursuit of money to cost you the peace that money was supposed to provide.

What do you think—can money bring peace of mind, or does peace ultimately come from something money cannot buy?

Explore more at the Rise & Inspire archive | Motivational Quotes

© 2026 Rise & Inspire. Follow our journey of reflection, renewal, and relevance.

Website: Home | Blog | About Us | Contact| Resources

Word Count:676

Do You Believe in Karma, or Just Wish It on Others?

Do you believe in karma?

We have all said it, usually through gritted teeth: karma will get them. I have said it too. But while writing today’s post, I noticed how rarely we say it about ourselves.

So I went back to what karma meant in the traditions that gave us the word. I looked at a Tamil epic about a king who condemned an innocent man without hearing him, and at the Bible’s surprising refusal to read suffering as punishment. Where I landed may not be where you expect.

I would love to hear how you see it. Is karma about justice for others, or responsibility for ourselves?

Do I Believe in Karma? Yes — Which Is Why I’ve Stopped Wishing It on Others

“Karma will get them.”

I have heard that sentence in offices, at bus stops and in family quarrels. I have said it myself. It is almost never said about the speaker. So before I answer today’s question, I want to look at how the question is usually asked.

  1. The Phrase We Reserve for Others

Karma may be the only law most of us believe in on someone else’s behalf. We invoke it when a rude colleague is promoted or a dishonest neighbour prospers. In that mood, karma is less a moral principle than a postponed revenge, a debt collector we hope will one day knock on another person’s door. If that is what belief in karma means, then I do not believe in it.

  1. What the Word Actually Means

The Sanskrit word karma simply means “action” or “deed.” In the Hindu, Buddhist and Jain traditions that shaped it, karma describes how what we do leaves its mark on us and on the world. The Bhagavad Gita asks us to act rightly while giving up any claim on the results. The Buddha placed the weight on intention: “Intention, I tell you, is kamma.” Neither text gives us a scoreboard for tracking our neighbours.

  1. The Epic That Made Karma Its Thesis

The Tamil epic Silappatikaram [1] opens by announcing three truths it will show. One of them is that past deeds return in full force and make us taste their fruit. The story that follows is, at its heart, a courtroom tragedy. A king condemns an innocent man, Kovalan, on the word of a thieving goldsmith, without hearing him. Kovalan’s widow, Kannagi, breaks her anklet before the throne and proves his innocence. The king cries out, “Am I a king? I am the thief,” and dies where he sits.

  1. Why We Built Courts Anyway

I spent most of my working life drafting and reforming laws. I have come to see every penal code as a quiet confession that we do not trust karma to deliver justice on time. Law is organised consequence. It insists on evidence, a hearing, and a verdict within a lifetime. The king’s failure in the epic was a failure of natural justice: he never heard the other side. Yet law has limits the old traditions noticed long ago. A statute can reach only what we do. It cannot reach what we intend, and it has no power over who we become.

  1. The Hardest Objection: Innocent Suffering

Any honest essay on karma must face the child born into misery and the cruel man who dies in comfort. Here the Bible offers a rebuke rather than a parallel. When the disciples asked whose sin had caused a man’s blindness, Jesus answered that it was neither his nor his parents’. When a tower fell at Siloam, he denied that its eighteen victims were worse than anyone else. Job’s friends lose their argument precisely because they read his suffering as payment. Even the Buddha counted the exact working-out of karma’s results among four things no one should try to calculate. These traditions disagree about whether karma exists, but they agree that I have no licence to read another person’s pain as a verdict.

  1. Where Consequences Land First

If karma is not a cosmic ledger, what remains? Something closer to home. Aristotle observed that we become just by doing just acts. Paul warned that whatever a person sows, that they will also reap. The Qur’an says that anyone who does an atom’s weight of good will see it. Read together, these point to the same place: the first person my actions reach is me. A lie repeated becomes a habit, a habit becomes a character, and character, far more than fortune, is the harvest I can be certain of gathering.

  1. So, Do I Believe in Karma?

Yes, but only in the version I am permitted to apply to myself. I cannot audit the universe’s books, and I should stop trying to audit my neighbour’s. What I can do is look at the seeds in my own hand.

The next time you are tempted to say that karma will catch up with someone, ask yourself this: if it caught up with you first, what would it find?

Note for readers

[1] The Silappatikaram (“The Tale of the Anklet”) is one of the Five Great Epics of Tamil literature. It is attributed to Ilango Adigal, traditionally described as a Chera prince who renounced the throne, and is dated variously between the second and sixth centuries CE. Its prologue names three truths the story will show. First, dharma turns into death for a ruler who errs in governance. Second, the great will honour a woman of true virtue. Third, past deeds return in full force to be lived through; in Tamil, ūḻvinai uruttu vantu ūṭṭum.

John Britto Kurusumuthu

Rise & Inspire · riseandinspire.co.in

In response to the WordPress Daily Writing Prompt — 25 September 2026

© 2026 Rise&Inspire. All Rights Reserved.

Website: Home | Blog | About Us | Contact| Resources

Word Count:963

Are You Writing What People Actually Want to Read?

How do you write what people actually want to read?

View all responses

The real test of writing is not whether the writer enjoyed writing it, but whether a reader finds a reason to keep reading. That reason is rarely found in the writer’s cleverness. It is found in the reader’s life—in a question they carry, a concern they revisit, or a thought they have not yet found words for.

 Across traditions, from Rumi to the Letter of James to the Tamil poet Avvaiyar, the counsel is remarkably similar: listen first, then offer something that matters. When a writer’s curiosity meets a reader’s need, content becomes conversation.

 Listen to What They Want, Write What They Need

 People read because they want something: a useful answer, a fresh perspective, a moment of recognition, a little encouragement, or simply the feeling that someone has put into words what they themselves were thinking.

 The usual advice follows naturally: find out what people want, and give it to them.

 I believe that advice is only half right.

 Good writing does begin by listening to what people want, but it ends by giving them what they need—and the two are not always the same.

1. Writing begins with the ear, not the pen.

The writer’s first task is to listen.

Listen to conversations. Listen to questions. Listen to the concerns people repeat. Listen to silence. Listen even to the subjects people avoid, because what goes unsaid is often what most needs saying.

Before a writer can speak meaningfully to readers, the writer must first learn to hear them.

2. What people ask for is only the surface.

Readers may say they want quick tips, short lists, and headlines that promise everything in five minutes. But look beneath the request, and something deeper often appears.

The person searching for “ten ways to sleep better” may really be asking how to quiet a worried mind.

The request is the door. The need is the room behind it.

Good writing does not stop at the door.

3. An old Indian teaching tradition wrapped the need inside the want.

The Panchatantra, the ancient Indian collection of animal fables, is traditionally framed around a problem every writer understands. A king had three sons who would not learn, and conventional study would have taken years. A teacher named Vishnu Sharma promised to make them wise in six months—and he did it through stories of jackals, crows, lions, and tortoises.

The princes wanted entertainment.

They needed statecraft.

He gave them both, and the lesson arrived without announcing itself.

That is a powerful lesson for writers. Sometimes the most effective way to give readers what they need is to begin with something they already want.

4. Every tradition places listening before speaking.

Rumi opens his great Masnavi not with instruction, but with a command to the ear: listen to the reed as it tells its tale of separation.

The Letter of James counsels believers to be quick to listen and slow to speak.

Traditions that agree on little else agree on this: those who wish to be heard must first learn to hear.

For a writer, listening is not a preliminary exercise. It is part of the writing itself.

5. Write to offer, not to display.

The Tamil poet Avvaiyar is remembered for a line of striking humility: what we have learned is a handful of earth; what we have not learned is the size of the world.[1]

A writer who writes chiefly to show what they know is writing to a mirror.

A writer who writes to offer something useful, meaningful, or illuminating is writing for another human being.

Those who draft laws learn the same discipline. A statute is not written for the person who drafts it, but for the citizen who may one day have to read it, understand it, and live by it.

Writing, at its best, is an act of service.

6. Listening is not the same as obeying.

Here the argument needs a counterweight.

A writer who merely echoes what the crowd wants becomes a vending machine: press a button, receive a product.

Popularity is not proof of value, and the most-clicked article is not always the most-needed one.

Yet the opposite error is just as real. A writer who ignores what readers want becomes a preacher in an empty hall—correct perhaps, but unheard.

Vishnu Sharma did neither.

He did not lecture the princes, and he did not merely amuse them. He listened to what they would accept and used it to carry what they required.

That may be one of the finest principles of writing: meet readers where they are, then take them somewhere worth going.

7. The real test belongs to the reader.

The question is not, “Did I enjoy writing this?”

It is:

“Will someone find a reason to keep reading?”

That reason may be an answer that works, a thought that stays, or a sentence that makes someone say, “Yes, that is exactly what I felt.”

Every one of those reasons lives in the reader’s life, not in the writer’s pride.

So, how do you write what people actually want to read?

You listen long enough to discover what they want, and you care enough to give them what they need.

Because readers may click for curiosity, stay for relevance, and return for value.

When the writer’s curiosity meets the reader’s need, writing becomes more than content.

It becomes a conversation.

Avvaiyar
The Tamil poet Avvaiyar is remembered for a line of striking humility: what we have learned is a handful of earth; what we have not learned is the size of the world.

 

Note for readers

[1] Avvaiyar is the name given to one or more revered women poets of Tamil literature across different centuries. The line quoted here, “Katrathu kaimann alavu, kallathathu ulagalavu” in Tamil, is traditionally attributed to her and is widely taught in Tamil Nadu as a lesson in intellectual humility.

 

John Britto Kurusumuthu

Rise & Inspire · riseandinspire.co.in

In response to the WordPress Daily Writing Prompt — 24 September 2026

© 2026 Rise&Inspire. All Rights Reserved.

Website: Home | Blog | About Us | Contact| Resources

Word Count:999

Would You Know What to Do If Your Legal Rights Were Affected?

Legal knowledge should not remain confined to courtrooms and law books. Know Your Legal Rights, a forthcoming Rise&Inspire series, explains how natural justice, fair hearing and legal remedies operate within the Indian legal system, through principles that resonate well beyond it.

 Can You Know Your Legal Rights Before You Need Them?

Most people become interested in law only when a legal problem finds them.

A court order may affect their property, their employment or their reputation. They may discover that a matter concerning them was decided without their knowledge, or that they ought to have been made a party to it. Suddenly they meet unfamiliar terms: impleadment, recall, review petition, writ petition, Special Leave Petition.

At such a moment, a basic understanding of the legal framework can make a real difference. Yet the law is often expressed in language familiar to lawyers but not always accessible to the citizens whose lives it governs.

Law is not meant only for lawyers and courtrooms. It belongs to every person who seeks fairness, dignity and justice. With this conviction, Rise&Inspire is preparing to introduce a new series under its Law category: Know Your Legal Rights.

Its guiding idea is simple. You do not have to be a lawyer to understand the law that protects your rights.

What the series will explore

The series will take up questions that citizens, litigants and students frequently encounter. It begins with first principles and moves towards specific remedies.

The foundations

•       What does the principle of natural justice mean?

•       Can a court pass an order affecting you without hearing you?

Parties to a proceeding

•       What is an impleadment petition?

•       Who is a necessary party, and who is a proper party?

•       What can you do if a court order affects your rights even though you were not a party?

Remedies before the same court

•       Can a court recall its own order?

•       What is a review petition?

Constitutional and appellate remedies

•       How does a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India work?

•       What is a writ appeal?

•       What is a Special Leave Petition under Article 136?

These are not merely technical questions. They go to the heart of procedural fairness, access to justice and the protection of legal rights.

What each article will offer

Each article will aim to go beyond a dictionary definition. Where appropriate, it will include:

1.     The legal issue in simple terms

2.    A practical, real-life illustration

3.     The underlying legal principle

4.    Relevant constitutional or statutory provisions

5.     Leading judicial decisions

6.    Practical aspects of pursuing the remedy

7.     A quick-reference summary

The articles will also connect with one another. A reader who begins with impleadment may next want to understand the difference between a necessary and a proper party. Someone reading about review may wish to see how it differs from recall. A reader exploring Article 226 may move on to writ appeals and the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction under Article 136. Over time, the series will grow into a structured legal knowledge resource within the Law category.

Who the series is for

For citizens, it offers an accessible introduction to legal rights and remedies. For litigants, it explains concepts and procedures they may meet in court. For law students, it provides a structured, plain-language foundation. For international readers, it shows how widely shared jurisprudential principles operate within the Indian legal system.

Indian law, universal principles

Rise&Inspire has readers across the world. Principles such as natural justice, the right to be heard, procedural fairness, judicial review and access to justice matter well beyond any single jurisdiction.

The practical discussion, however, will be grounded in Indian law. Unless otherwise indicated, references to constitutional provisions, statutes, court procedures, limitation periods, precedents and the hierarchy of courts relate to India. Readers elsewhere may find the principles valuable for comparative study, but the procedures and remedies in their own jurisdictions may differ.

A note on legal information

The articles in this series provide general legal information for educational purposes. They are not legal advice on any particular matter. Whether a remedy is available, and how it applies, depends on the facts of the case, the nature of the proceedings, the court concerned and the applicable law and rules of procedure. Because many remedies are subject to strict time limits, anyone facing a specific legal problem should consult a qualified legal practitioner without delay.

Coming soon on Rise&Inspire

The first articles in Know Your Legal Rights will appear shortly under the Law category.

A complicated provision becomes clearer when it is connected with an everyday situation. A remedy becomes meaningful when a reader understands the problem it was designed to solve. That is the approach this series will bring to the law.

Know your rights. Understand the law. Approach justice with greater awareness.

John Britto Kurusumuthu

Rise&Inspire

Explore more at the Rise&Inspire archive | Law

© 2026 Rise&Inspire. All Rights Reserved.

Website: Home | Blog | About Us | Contact| Resources

What Is the Most Spontaneous Thing You Can Do Without Leaving Home?

What’s the most spontaneous thing you’ve ever done?

View all responses

Ask people about the most spontaneous thing they have ever done, and you usually hear about a trip, a purchase, or a ticket bought at midnight. Mine is quieter. One morning I set aside a carefully planned day and followed a single thought instead.

In this post I argue that spontaneity needs a plan to depart from, and that a prepared mind improvises best. I also admit that not every abandoned plan is spontaneity, because some of it is plain avoidance.

I would love to hear where you draw that line.

The Day I Did Nothing on Purpose

Perhaps the most spontaneous thing I ever did was not doing something at all. I abandoned a carefully planned day and followed a thought that had no appointment in my calendar.

I had arranged the day the evening before, as I usually do. There were calls to return, a document to finish, an errand in town, and a letter that could not wait another week. The list sat on the table, neat and reasonable. Then, over the first cup of tea, a thought arrived. It was not urgent, and it was not useful in any way the list would recognise. It simply asked to be followed.

I followed it. The calls waited, and so did the document. By evening the list was untouched, and I had spent a whole day walking behind an idea.

When people answer this question, they usually describe a sudden trip, a reckless purchase, or a ticket bought at midnight. I want to argue for something quieter.

1. Spontaneity begins in the mind, not the feet.

We think of spontaneity as movement: getting up and going. But the body only carries out a decision the mind has already made. The truly unplanned moment is the one in which a thought is allowed to change the shape of a day. The trip is only the part other people can see.

2. You can only abandon a plan you have made.

This is the paradox. A person with no plan cannot be spontaneous, only adrift. Spontaneity needs a structure to depart from, just as a detour needs a road. My day felt free precisely because it had been so carefully arranged. The list did not prevent spontaneity. It made spontaneity possible.

3. The prepared mind improvises best.

The Tamil poet Kavi Kalamegam [1] was renowned as an aasu kavi, an extempore poet, and for his ingenious silēḍai verses in which words or lines could carry more than one meaning. It looks like pure impulse. Yet no one can play with two meanings in an instant without already holding the whole language in hand.

In the Zhuangzi, the Chinese classic, Cook Ding carves an ox for Lord Wenhui so smoothly that it looks like a dance. He explains that after years of practice he stopped seeing the whole ox, and his knife now simply finds the spaces between the joints. His blade, in use for nineteen years, is still as sharp as the day it left the grindstone.

What we call spontaneity is often preparation that has finally forgotten itself.

4. A thought followed is an appointment kept with oneself.

Our calendars are full of other people’s claims. Rarely is there an entry for the question that has been waiting quietly in our own minds. The Book of Ecclesiastes says there is a time for every purpose under heaven. Some of those purposes never make it onto a list. They have to be given a day anyway, or they are never given one at all.

5. Not every abandoned plan is spontaneity.

Here I must be fair to the other side. Sometimes we drop a plan not because a thought has called us, but because the task is hard and we want an excuse. That is not spontaneity. It is avoidance wearing a better coat. The difference lies not in the leaving but in the returning.

Avoidance comes back empty. A true thought, followed honestly, comes back with something.

What was the thought? It was a question I had carried for years and never given a single morning to. I will not name it even now. The question matters less than the fact that, for once, it was given a whole day.

I returned the calls the next day and finished the document, a little late. Nothing collapsed. But I still think of that day as the only one I can remember that was not written in advance.

I have come to believe that a well-planned life needs at least one such day: a blank space the plan did not foresee, where something unplanned is allowed to happen.

What is the most spontaneous thing you have ever done—and how do you know it was spontaneity rather than avoidance?

Note

[1] Kavi Kalamegam was a Tamil poet usually placed in the fifteenth century. He is remembered as an aasu kavi, a poet who composed verses instantly on a theme set by others, and for his silēḍai verses, in which each line can hold two meanings at once. His name means “dark rain-cloud”, a tribute to the way verses poured from him.

John Britto Kurusumuthu

Rise & Inspire · riseandinspire.co.in

In response to the WordPress Daily Writing Prompt — 23 September 2026

© 2026 Rise&Inspire. All Rights Reserved.

Website: Home | Blog | About Us | Contact| Resources

Word Count:906

Is Self-Care Really About Making Time, or Removing Things? 

How do you make time for self-care?

How do you make time for self-care? I tried answering that honestly and realised the question itself was part of the problem. Every time I “scheduled” rest, it became one more task on the list. So I turned it around and asked what I could take away instead. Less noise. Less pressure to reply at once. Less guilt about an hour that produces nothing. What was left surprised me: a quiet morning, a good conversation, a few pages of a book. 

In today’s post I explore this idea, drawing on the Sabbath, Buddhist and Sufi traditions, and an old Tamil classic. I would love to hear what you have removed from your own day.

The Wrong Verb: Why Self-Care Is Found by Subtraction

The question asks how I make time for self-care. I want to begin by quarrelling with the verb.

Nobody makes time. Each day arrives with the same twenty-four hours, most of them already claimed before we wake. To “make time” for self-care is to treat it as one more appointment, one more box to tick. And once care becomes a task, it quietly becomes another source of pressure. The wellness industry understands this well. It sells schedules, subscriptions, retreats and routines, and it calls the purchase rest.

So I have stopped thinking of self-care as something I have to fit into my day. Instead, I ask a different question: what should I remove from my day so that I can hear myself again?

  1. Remove the noise. Much of what fills our hours is not work or duty but sound: notifications, background television, the scroll that begins as a glance and ends as an hour. None of it asks much of us, and that is exactly why it takes so much. Silence is not empty. It is the room in which our own thoughts finally become audible.
  2. Remove the pressure to respond immediately. Not every message needs an answer within minutes. The expectation of instant reply is a modern habit, not a moral obligation. A thoughtful answer given tomorrow is usually worth more than a hurried one given now. Delay, rightly used, is a form of respect for the question and for ourselves.
  3. Remove the belief that every minute must be productive. This is the hardest removal, because the belief feels like virtue. We measure our worth in output and feel guilty for an idle hour. But a walk without an agenda produces nothing you can count, and it can still restore the whole person who does the counting.
  4. Remove borrowed urgency. Many of our emergencies belong to other people. Their deadlines become our anxieties, and their haste becomes our pace. Learning to tell a real obligation from an imported urgency is itself an act of care.
  5. Notice what remains. When these things are removed, what is left is modest: a quiet morning, a thoughtful conversation, a few pages of a book, a walk, or simply sitting still. None of these needs to be scheduled. They were always there, crowded out.
  6. The old traditions knew this before we did. The Hebrew Sabbath is rooted in the idea of ceasing. It is not a holiday filled with leisure but a day marked by what is not done. Buddhist teaching speaks of renunciation, the letting go of what binds the mind, as the path to clarity. In the Sufi tradition, khalwa, a period of withdrawal and seclusion, is undertaken so that the seeker can hear what the world drowns out. The Naladiyar[1], the classical Tamil collection of quatrains, returns again and again to the passing nature of wealth, youth and worldly striving, and reminds its readers that clinging to them only deepens the unrest. Across faiths and languages, the pattern is the same: the self is recovered by subtraction, not accumulation.
  7. A necessary concession. Subtraction is not equally available to everyone. A daily-wage labourer, a single parent working two jobs, or someone caring for an ailing relative cannot simply remove duties from the day. To preach stillness to the overburdened can sound like privilege dressed as wisdom. Yet even in the fullest life, some small removal is usually possible: one message left unanswered for an hour, five minutes left unaccounted for, one worry set down before sleep. And those of us who can subtract more have a quiet duty not to load our own noise and urgency onto those who cannot.

Perhaps self-care is not always about doing something for ourselves.

Sometimes, it is about stopping long enough to remember who we are.

Note [1] The Naladiyar is a collection of four hundred quatrains in classical Tamil, traditionally attributed to Jain ascetics. It belongs to the Pathinenkilkanakku, the Eighteen Minor Classics of Tamil literature, and is known for its ethical and didactic verse.

John Britto Kurusumuthu

Rise & Inspire · riseandinspire.co.in

In response to the WordPress Daily Writing Prompt — 22 September 2026

© 2026 Rise&Inspire. All Rights Reserved.

Website: Home | Blog | About Us | Contact| Resources

Word Count:838

What Place Felt Like Home When You Were a Stranger?

What’s a place you visited that felt like home?

Plot twist: the place that felt most like home was one where nobody knew my name. No one asked what I do. No one remembered what I did. Bliss. New post is up, and it may change how you define home.

What’s a Place You Visited That Felt Like Home?

Some questions return to us year after year, and each time they ask something slightly different.

In December 2023, I wrote about Alexandria, Virginia, the place that stirred my mind. In December 2024, I wrote about Silent Valley in Kerala, the place that stilled my soul:
https://riseandinspire.co.in/2024/12/05/why-do-some-places-leave-a-lasting-mark-on-our-souls/

In December 2025, when the same prompt returned, I chose not to rewrite what I had already said from the heart:
https://riseandinspire.co.in/2025/12/05/lasting-places-impact/

Today’s prompt is not a repeat. It asks a new question. A favourite place is one we admire. A place that feels like home is one where we stop performing. Beneath the words, the prompt is really asking: where did you unexpectedly feel that you belonged?

My answer surprises even me. The place that felt most like home was one where I was a complete stranger.

  1. Home is usually where we are known, and that is its hidden weight.
    At home, people know our titles, our history, our mistakes, and our expected roles. Every greeting carries a record. Being known is a comfort, but it is also a quiet demand to keep being the person others remember.
  2. In Alexandria, I was known by no one.
    Walking its old streets, near the slow water of the Potomac, I carried no designation and no reputation. No file followed me into the room. For the first time in years, nobody needed me to be anything, and I found I could simply be. That release, not the architecture or the libraries, is what felt like home.
  3. An ancient Tamil poet understood this two thousand years ago.
    In the Purananuru, the Sangam poet Kaniyan Poongundranar begins with a line every Tamil child learns: “Yaadhum oore, yaavarum kelir.” Every town is my town; all people are my kin (1). He does not say home is the place of our birth. He says belonging is a posture of the heart that we carry into every town.
  4. Other traditions reach the same insight by different roads.
    In Buddhist teaching, the seeker “goes forth from home into homelessness” (2). This is not a loss but a liberation from the claims that tie us down. In the Islamic tradition, the Prophet is reported to have advised, “Be in this world as though you were a stranger or a traveller” (3). The Letter to the Hebrews describes the faithful as those who “confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth” (Hebrews 11:13). Four traditions, one pattern: the stranger is not the one who has lost home, but the one free enough to find it anywhere.
  5. So belonging is not something a place gives us. It is something we recognise in ourselves.
    A place feels like home when it lets us meet the person we are beneath our roles. That is why the feeling can come upon us unexpectedly, in a foreign city, on a hired bench, in a borrowed room. The place does not create the belonging; it removes what was hiding it.
  6. A fair objection deserves an honest answer.
    It is easy for a traveller with a return ticket to praise being a stranger. For the refugee, the migrant labourer, and the exile, strangeness is not freedom but wound. Their longing for home is not a failure of spiritual maturity; it is a just claim on the world. The insight of Kaniyan and the pilgrims is not a licence to romanticise rootlessness. It is a call to make every town truly a town for all, so that no one is a stranger by force.
  7. What this means for the rest of us.
    We need not travel far to test it. Ask where you feel least required to perform. That place, whether a city, a chapel, a quiet library, or a friend’s kitchen, is showing you something about home that your own address may have forgotten.

Silent Valley taught me the power of stillness. Alexandria taught me something quieter still: that home is less a location than a recognition, and that sometimes we must become strangers before we can recognise ourselves.

Where did you unexpectedly feel that you belonged?

Notes for readers

(1) The Purananuru is one of the eight anthologies of classical Sangam Tamil poetry, composed roughly two thousand years ago. Poem 192, by Kaniyan Poongundranar, is among the most widely quoted verses in Tamil literature for its vision of universal kinship.

(2) In the Pali Buddhist texts, the phrase describes renunciation: leaving household life to pursue liberation.

(3) Reported by Abdullah ibn Umar and recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari, one of the principal collections of hadith, the sayings attributed to the Prophet Muhammad.

John Britto Kurusumuthu

Rise & Inspire · riseandinspire.co.in

In response to the WordPress Daily Writing Prompt — 21 September 2026

© 2026 Rise&Inspire. All Rights Reserved.

Website: Home | Blog | About Us | Contact| Resources

Word Count:873