The point at issue is different from the pursuit of happiness. In the latter case the definition of happiness is presumed to be confined within the traditional parameters. Is the definition of happiness changing" or the foundation is the same, and the super-structures are changing? There are changes in approach and styles in anything 'modern', hence it is necessary to ponder whether the basic, wholesome joys of life are also subject to human amendment. The preliminary test is to have a quick survey of the small pleasures of life, which are independent of economic indicators. The bigger pleasures in one's lifetime come at rare and long intervals. Hence these remain as landmarks in the footprints of life (mixed metaphors are one of life's pleasant surprises). At the mundane level, pleasures are tagged to desires. "The more you have, the more you want. No desire, no want". Those who retire from the drawing room to the hujra (as one of my dear friends did, soon after retirement from service) have also the right to seek happiness and contentment, whether through tuition or intuition.

But nowadays, the market forces, and the virtual world of alluring advertisements on the screen in the silly box unmake more lives than make it. Cyber adventures could be exciting but be prepared for the crash of the hard disc inside you.

Materialism in this information age has taxed the mind with varied options available for 'buying' instant happiness'. But there is one restriction: money is round and made to roll, while the secret urge is represented by the epigram "money is flat and made to pile up." But, alas, happiness is not for sale, and money cannot buy contentment and peace of mind. Rockefeller was sick till he became a philanthropist. There is natural happiness, and man-made happiness. The joy of motherhood is priceless, while few can afford a BMW, claimed to be the perfect interface between man, machine and the road. A good cup of tea at the right time is more satisfying than... you name it.