What sets anything apart? What’s the whole “Odd man out” concept?
In a gurukul environment, two young lads were really good in their class and were noticed by their “guru” for their capabilities.
To choose the best, “guru” decided to test them in one grand finale.
This competition was only applicable to those two and NOT the rest.
The challenge was to make the best “Bow and Arrow” keeping in mind the heavy demand for good archers at that time.
Rules were as follows:
1) They could not use any of the gurukul resources at freewill
2) The bow and arrow had to be functional
3) They will NOT see each other or their work
4) Time given to each was 3 days
As a part of class/caste immunity, the guru was unaware of the contestants’ backgrounds.
Incidentally, one was the son of an army commander (senapati) and the other was a carpenter’s son.
While the boys had learnt a lot about bows and arrows and were adept themselves at self-defence techniques, making a functional bow and arrow was a real challenge. In a gurukul environment, they were obviously away from the city and their parents, neighbours or relatives.
As a well-practiced technique, both the boys began by meditating. Getting their entire focus on to the objective given to them. They internalized the rules and were digging in their memory to get the best possible solution.
Early on, it occurred to the “Senapati’s” son that he could use the available resources but after requesting and justifying the need. That was what “not at freewill” meant.
The carpenter’s son did not seem to comprehend that point. He was visualizing everything he could and was building a mental blue-print of the bow and arrow.
Day 2, the senapati’s son went to the “guru” and requested the list of resources that could be used for this contest. He was duly answered and he began his work.
The carpenter’s son set off towards the woods to collect his resources based on what he had visualized.
Amongst the two, guru secretly rooted for the carpenter’s son to win but was a tad disappointed at not seeing him approach for the resources. He was however happy that one of the boys had the courage to question the rules and put up a justifying request.
Day 3, both the boys were busy building their respective functional bow and arrow.
The final day arrived when they were supposed to display their work.
The Senapati’s son came ahead and unveiled his piece of art. It was a magnificently built strong bow.
The bow was made from layered materials of dissimilar substances viz., shredded sinew, sapwood and heartwood. The arrows were made of the best wood shafts with alloy metal tips (new technology developed locally) available. Almost perfect bowstring attached to the bow’s staff to make for a perfect trigger.
The arrows were shaped to enable a fast, straight line flight with the longest reach.
From the corner of his eye, guru saw a tinge of disappointment in the carpenter’s son’s eyes even before he had unveiled his piece of work.
When he displayed his bow and arrow, the bow was made of light flexible bamboo wood variety, the bowstring was made of shredded and twined coir. The arrow was made from dry grass blades . Although technically functional, the bow and arrow could not kill or hunt . His creation was looked down upon and mocked by everyone including the jury and fellow students.
While the guru was disappointed and sulked internally, the jury expectantly adjudged senapati’s son the winner.
Feeling guilty of not spotting the talent rightfully, guru retired after that academic year.
Years passed by and upon his return to the city, he curiously enquired about the two boys.
Senapati’s son was an obvious choice in the army after spotting the skill to make the best bows and arrows. However, unfortunately he was killed in the previous war.
The carpenter’s son on the other hand was a minister with the King.
He was both, perplexed and intrigued, by the turn of events. He decided to check with the carpenter’s son himself.
The harmless but functional model that he had created during the competition was appreciated by his father and used it as a successful model for toys. That was soon in demand from the neighbouring cities and kingdoms as well. Their family fortunes changed for good.
The then education minister (also on the jury panel) visited both the boys to understand their modus operandi.
The senapati’s son said in a matter of fact tone.
1) When I meditated, I recreated the instructions given. As I kept repeating them, it became clear that the resources were at my disposal, but on justifying. I had to question the rules.
2) Through a fellow student, I checked on the materials being used by my competitor. A bit of bending rules was required.
2) While I personally hated war, I was privy to some of the tales my father narrated. I simply visualized my father’s bow and arrow, the teachings that were imparted in our gurukul and some of the points from my father’s stories. I used all of them to create my design.
3) While the design was mine, the expertise of materials used were borrowed.
4) Rest, as they say, is history.
The carpenter’s wise son thus spoke:
1) When I meditated, the first thing I realized was that I’m going to be judged by something that I don’t enjoy doing.
2) It was evident that I could use the resources with proper justification.
3) Nevertheless, I wanted to enjoy the opportunity that was unavailable to the other students and hence decided otherwise.
4) It needed to be functional. Hence started to think of what could make an interesting toy for other fellow students to play without hurting anyone.
5) I could recollect all the teachings, materials and it’s properties and made my model with the only objective of keeping it functional.
6) I was obviously dejected for being mocked at. Upon returning home, when I reluctantly showed the failed model to my father, he was thrilled at finding the toy he’d been looking for. Rest, as they say, is history.
The education minister was pleased and put in a word about the carpenter’s son to the king.
He had the rare skill of converting available information into valuable knowledge.
The teacher was once again stung by guilt and was ashamed of his decisions. However, this time, he resolved to correct his mistake and stayed with the failed student to help him with his experience and wisdom as a bonus. After all, he would learn a lot too in the bargain.
So, let’s revisit the questions. What stands apart? What is the concept of “odd man out”?
List of my Top 5 observations:
1) Winner had questioned the rules
2) Carpenter’s son had been totally compliant.
3) While the winner “stood-out” with his master-piece, carpenter’s son was the “odd-man” out with his funny replica of a model. His approach was actually a bright example of “out of the box” thinking towards LIFE.
4) While the jury was blinded by their collective thought process at that time, their decision did not stand the test of time. Success in that competition did NOT spell success in life.
5) Similar qualities make some a Leader and some an outcast.
These observations have a lot to do with society, acceptance and our value system. Its lineage and our legacy.
While I’ll leave you with these observations, there are many more hidden lessons in this story that can be interpreted in today’s context.
I’d want to hear your versions as well. There are NO rules to use the Comments section below.
No comments:
Post a Comment