Skip to main content

Taking decisions

 


Naomi was a passive victim of a wrong decision that heaped tragedies upon tragedies upon her family. They decided to migrate to Moab when famine struck their town, Bethlehem, which rather ironically means "house of bread." There in Moab they had food in plenty, I suppose, but she lost all the male members of the family. Her husband first, her sons next, in that order. All that was left was two young widows and she.

It was indeed a wrong decision. They should not have left the Bethlehem. The Book of Ruth tells us that all the residents of that town did not leave their homes and fields for Moab during the famine. They stayed back and fought the famine. 

However, Naomi was not probably responsible for that wrong decision. In a patriarchal society like hers, the husband and the adult male members took the decisions on behalf of the rest of the family. The women just followed since they didn't have a say in what was decided. Probably, the decision to go to Moab was her husband's decision not even of her sons' since they were probably young.

However, what is important is what Naomi did when the authority to take decisions in the family fell on her. In the absence of her husband and sons, she had to take decisions. She took the right decision: to return back to the homeland. That was the right decision in the right direction. 

It led to blessings in her life. She had security in her life as Boaz walked in as the husband and redeemer of Ruth. There was immense joy when Obed was born who later became the grandfather of David the great king of Israel. Then centuries later, the Jesus Christ the savior of the world was born in her family. 

One right decision, in the right direction is all that you have to take to walk the path of God's blessings and joy.

[Photo courtesy: Engin Akyurt]

Popular posts from this blog

Pandita Ramabai versus Swami Vivekananda: Two Visions of India

This is more than a story about two remarkable nineteenth-century Indians. It is a story about two competing ways of seeing India itself. Pandita Ramabai and Swami Vivekananda were contemporaries, reformers, and influential voices who introduced India to the Western world. Swami Vivekananda (b. 1863—d. 1902 and Pandita Ramabai (b. 1858—d.1922) were contemporaries for about 39 years. Pandita Ramabai was five years older than the Swami and lived 20 more years than he did. Both individuals had connections to Brahmo Samaj. Swami Vivekananda was an official member, whereas Pandita Ramabai closely aligned with its principles and members but did not formally join. When Ramabai arrived in Kolkata in 1878, she received a warm welcome from Brahmo Samaj leaders such as Keshab Chandra Sen, who was notably impressed by her Sanskrit skills and encouraged her to study the Vedas, which were traditionally restricted to men. Although she adopted many of the movement's social reform ideas—such as opp...

A Chat With God

A Chat With God : Prayer can sometimes be a tough thing for people. This video takes a look at some of the struggles and thoughts a person might have with prayer, through the lens of a 'chat' conversation with God.

The Smoking Meat-Eating Swami

  Typically, we imagine a revered spiritual monk as a quiet figure subsisting on fresh vegetables, clear water, and pure air, untouched by worldly habits. However, Swami Vivekananda challenges this traditional image entirely. His life was characterised not by a strict adherence to conventions but by practical wisdom, profound humanity, and a bold rejection of superficial dogma. Throughout his life, Vivekananda regularly enjoyed cigars, pipes, and the traditional Indian hookah. It was a habit he picked up in his youth and maintained during his travels across India and abroad. Yet, for him, a simple pipe could carry profound spiritual meaning. During his wanderings across India, he once asked a man from a lower caste for a smoke from his hookah. When the man hesitated because of the era’s strict customs of untouchability, Vivekananda initially walked away—only to turn around immediately, realising that bowing to caste distinctions violated his core belief in spiritual unity. He took ...