You can not step twice in the same river

You can not step twice in the same river. What was the comfortable luxurious life one can live back in 20th century? It was certainly gaining an authority and power under British Raj. But, in summers of 1921, a 24 year old boy, who happened to be a Indian Civil Services (ICS) probationer, resigned from it. After giving up a great career, that boy later joined congress.

But again due to external hindrance he resigned from the presidency of congress in 1939. After stepping out, he formed the Forward Bloc, escaped India, crossed oceans, and raised the Indian National Army. That boy became 'Netaji' of all. He was none other than Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose. By his story, we can analyse that his methods changed, his platforms changed means rivers changed. But his inner state evolved. His cause grew stronger. By connecting the dots let's find out the meaning of essay. It's about the river that changes, it's about the self that evolves means self can also change. Deeper questions will be if both changes the what stays constant?

Is change is always a positive change? If evolution is a change then those who are stable, are not evolving? lets find out with arguments. Firstly, the river itself is moving forward that is the reason it's not the same river. It's state is changing. For instance, it is an era of globalisation which not just transcends people but also culture, ideas and philosophy. It's impact is visible in Indian society like the rigidity of castes suddenly becomes flexible in urban enclaves why? because of skill based priorities that leads to anonymity. Now , as we are looking forward about change then change may happen in self , so if some one's perspective evolves then the same river might feel different to that person. This is one of the strategy used by our Indian governments in disputed region to win over hearts and minds of the people in the region. This de-radicalisation executed by operation Sadbhavana gave people new perspective and opportunities to live better lives. Sticking to our arguments of self and river , it may not about a change in same river rather a person is stepping into a whole new river, this brings perspective of radical unique-ness. For instance, renowned social reformer Dr. B.R. Ambedkar challenged the Hindu religion throughout his life. He was critical of Brahminical hegemony. Nevertheless he realised that it was hard to make reform within such a complex system and accepted whole new religion of Buddhism. So this is the scale of boldness one can take to grow.

Moreover we are looking for self that is not steping in same river in case that is true because what if the thing we are assuming as a river, is just a pond? and one realises it As we can see due to rise of feminist perspective, many of things which were linked to safety of a woman were nothing but a patriarchal control. As Carole Patman said many medieval thinkers ignored the domestic sphere considering them private affairs but once they ignored that, they ignored domestic violence, violation of freedom and liberty. But we should analyse our essay critically also to see what other side looks like. one may step into same river of mistakes and faults because people often make same repetitive mistakes and stay at the same position For instance, America don't have deep bureaucratic memory. The result of this is that America does same mistake again and again. Be it Vietnam war, Iraq war, settlement in Afganistan, Iran regime change and all. Moreover one can observe that people not just step in same river, rather they swim though it. This may because of low consciousness or fear or conditioned habits. This can be true in the case of Muhammad Bin Tughalaq and his decisions, which lacked empirical evidences and assessment. As he trasferred his capital from Delhi to Dawlatabad which lead to forced migration, administrative failure which valued nothing because he returned to Delhi again. Additionally the argument of swimming in same river may be true in case of false pride or normalising wrong doing. For instance, many people don't recognise the rights of LGBTQIA+ community, insted they spread hate and outrage on digital platforms, which lacks Sensitivity of the issue While some people stay in river at same location because they want stability in life rather that growth. This mistake of considering stagnation for stability is the ultimate real human truth.

This mistake of considering stagnation for stability is the ultimate real human truth. For instance if M.S. Dhoni would have thought of accepting the life of Ticket collector for family's happiness then India would have lost the great captain of cricket team and a trophy collector. At the same, it may also happen that person in the river is at the point where river is meeting the ocean and he may be fearful of this massive transformation and increased unpredictability. This we can relate with Sikkim's integration with our India, as a Indian state in 1975. As it was complex and unpredictable as questions were raised about autonomy, regional identity and security. But in a long run we sailed through it.