Maybe it’s my cynicism that does it, but I think I’ve developed a critical eye that directs me to the possibilities of underlying philosophies in what people say. So this morning I saw another one of the “relentless reflection” series on which I’d written a while back. It was a post of a parable that left us with the lesson that we should not dwell in the past.
I saw it differently. The parable:
Two monks, one senior and one junior, travelled together on a journey. They both took a vow of silence, and they both took a vow to never touch a woman. At a point, they came across a river. As they set towards the water to wade across, a young girl’s voice called to them, “Bhante, I cannot cross the river alone. Please, help”
Without a single word or a single moment of hesitation, the senior monk lifted the young woman onto his back, and the three of them crossed the river. Once to the other side, the senior monk placed the woman on the ground. The two monks continued their journey.
A few hours later, the junior monk exploded at the senior monk, “How dare you?! How could you touch her?! We both took a vow to never touch a woman!”
The senior monk looked at the junior monk and calmly replied, “I left the woman by the river. Why have you not?”
So often we unnecessarily carry our past with us. We hold onto resentments, anger, and hurts. Sometimes we long for things to be what they were, and this leads to continued pain, frustration, and suffering. It leads to artificial obstacles obstructing our paths forward. The fact is that humans are messy, and even though we may do things sometimes that don’t align with our ideals, our values, or our goals, no good comes from carrying the thought remnants of those actions and behaviors with us. Learn from the experience? Absolutely. Dwell in the past? No way! Right here. Right now. It’s the only place we can ever be.
What are you still carrying that you should have left by the river, and what are you going to do about it?
Wonderful sentiments…but poorly communicated. The underlying message seemed immediately obvious to me: “It’s alright to compromise your integrity and break promises – as long as you’re willing to forget about it in the end.” Hey, the past can sometimes be inconvenient. Don’t let that bother you.
Now we know that’s not what the writer was getting at, but why use a parable where you do that – where you break a vow and then brush it off – to illustrate that point? Sure, it may sound cold-hearted to say he should’ve left her, but honestly, there are other ways to approach this without compromising one’s integrity.
But the story also seemed to illustrate an underlying philosophy that thinks the whole point of life is to assuage one’s own guilt and not looking for creative solutions that can hold on to an appropriate standard.
It’s that “me”-centeredness rearing its ugly head yet again. And I’m not saying that anyone is immune to it. Some people still seem capable of feeling a little shame over it. Still, I’m a bit suspicious that we talk past each other here. There’s no way people with this disconnect can understand each other. “This is wrong because it doesn’t look at a solution untainted by your selfishness” doesn’t work when you’re talking to those who have spent their whole lives believing that what they feel is paramount, and that their truth is as valid as any other.
In reality, who has the broader view? The ones who are willing to admit their weaknesses and look elsewhere for the solutions? Or the ones who look first to themselves for the satisfaction they desire?
There seems to be a shift going on here, and while I’ve always appreciated the creativity of youth, I’m still left with an ill feeling that perhaps we’ve reached a crossroads that will define the new future — a future that can’t survive the contradictions created by its own dominant philosophy.