గుడ్డివాడి కాలు కుంటివాడికి ఆధారమైనట్లు

This expression describes a situation where someone performs a task haphazardly, clumsily, or without any sense of direction or awareness. It is used when someone's actions are messy and lack the precision or skill required for the job.

This proverb describes a situation where a person in power or authority directs their frustration or anger only toward someone who is weaker, helpless, or unable to retaliate, rather than addressing the actual cause of the problem.

This expression describes a situation where a person loses their only source of support or guidance. It is used when someone is rendered completely helpless or becomes directionless after losing a critical tool, person, or resource they relied upon entirely.

This proverb is used to mock someone who pretends to be virtuous or meticulous while their actions or surroundings are clearly flawed. It describes a situation where a person claims to be 'pure' (chokkam) while relying on a flimsy 'bamboo screen' (tadaka) for protection or privacy, highlighting hypocrisy or a false sense of security.

This proverb implies that everyone has their own unique way of thinking, limitations, or perspectives based on their personal circumstances. It is often used to suggest that one person's logic or solution might not be applicable or understandable to others, or that individuals act according to their own specific nature and constraints.

This expression highlights the contrast between ownership and detachment. It implies that a person who has a stake in the house (the family member) works with utmost dedication and responsibility, whereas a guest or outsider enjoys the benefits (the meal) without the same burden of labor or long-term concern for the resources.

This proverb is used to describe a situation where someone who lacks knowledge or expertise tries to guide another person who is equally ignorant. It highlights the inevitable failure or disaster that occurs when leadership or advice is sought from incompetent sources. It is equivalent to the English expression 'the blind leading the blind'.

This expression describes a situation where two people with different disabilities or weaknesses cooperate to help each other. It signifies mutual aid or synergy where one person's strength compensates for another's weakness, and vice-versa, allowing both to achieve what they couldn't alone.

This rhetorical question is used to highlight a situation where the choice is obvious. It implies that everyone naturally desires what is beneficial or necessary for them, and there is no doubt about their preference. It is often used when someone asks a person if they want something that is clearly desirable.

This proverb is used to describe an act of excessive waste or unnecessary decoration on something that is fundamentally broken or useless. It highlights the irony of spending resources to enhance something that cannot benefit from the enhancement, similar to 'putting lipstick on a pig' or 'pearls before swine.'