Fruit As A Symbol of the Result of Action
I took up psephology recently. I quickly became clear that voting
systems which better reflect the will of the electorate than do the
systems of voting presently in use in the US and in Israel also
reward insincere voting in some ways. That is, there are systems
that will produce fairer results if and only if the electorate vote
sincerely, and that is in no wise a given.
This realization that this conundrum is an integral part of all
systems of voting devised thus far caused me to feel disheartened and
discouraged. Why knock myself out only to learn and then promulgate
something that might in the end cause more problems than presently
exist on the off chance that people will use the systems properly and
vote sincerely? Considering the matter, I realized that most
improvements contain within them greater opportunities for abuse and
risks than did that which preceded them. Surely we cannot prevent
progress that can lead to greater emancipation, abilities and quality
of life because of the possibility that some will cause greater harm
in the future than they cause now. On the other hand, one has to be
responsible and consider the risks.
Troubled by these thoughts I was reminded of the following teachings:
The following story is from the Talmud:
An old man was planting a tree. A young person passed by and
asked, "What are you planting?"
"A carob tree," the old man replied.
"Silly fool," said the youth. "Don't you know that it takes 70 years
for a carob tree to bear fruit?"
"That's alright," said the old man. "Just as others planted for me, I
plant for future generations."
There is another, similar, version of this story in the Talmud:
Honi the Wise One was also known as Honi the Circle Maker. As wise as
he was, Honi sometimes saw something that puzzled him. Then he would
ask questions so he could unravel the mystery.
One day, Honi the Circle Maker was walking on the road and saw a man
planting a carob tree. Honi asked the man, "How long will it take for
this tree to bear fruit?"
The man replied, "Seventy years."
Honi then asked the man, "And do you think you will live another
seventy years and eat the fruit of this tree?"
The man answered, "Perhaps not. However, when I was born into this
world, I found many carob trees planted by my father and grandfather.
Just as they planted trees for me, I am planting trees for my
children and grandchildren so they will be able to eat the fruit of
these trees."
There is another tradition that teaches a not dissimilar lesson:
In order to understand the teaching we have to understand some
background:
The story I am about to present is taken from the Bhagavad Gita,
perhaps the single most important text in Hinduism. It is one chapter
from the epic the Mahabharata.The frame story of the Mahabharata is a
battle between cousins over who has the right to rule. Both sides
claim legitimacy, and when they cannot settled the issue peacefully,
they prepare for war.
On the eve of great Mahabharata battle, Arjuna asked his charioteer
to drive their chariot out to the front line so he could look over
the opposition he must face the next day. As he looked at his foes,
he recognized his favorite teacher, Drona, and his beloved grand
uncle, Bhishma, and many other relatives and friends. Horrified to
realize that he must kill the very people he loved, he threw down his
bow and arrow and told Krishna he would not fight.
This is the teaching:
The yoga of holy indifference is called karma yoga. "You must be
indifferent to the fruits of your actions," he (Krishna) told
Arjuna. "You have a right to the deeds, never to the fruits. If you
can perform your deeds but are holy indifferent to the results of
your actions, you will not build up any karma and you will not be
reborn. Fight because you are a warrior, but don't mind what happens
or who wins. On action alone be thy interest, never on its fruits."
What thinks you?
Does fruit represent the result of algorithms in these teachings? If
so, an algorithm of what kinds of actions? Is there a common
denominator among those actions? If, in your opinion, fruit does not
represent the outcome of an algorithm, why does it not? Can you
elaborate?
What difference(s) do you see in the two versions of the story from
the Talmud? In the former the interlocutor is a brash young man. In
the latter the interlocutor is the sage Honi. They ask the same
question, but how and why they ask is very different. I think the
similarities in the two versions are apparent; but I might be wrong.
What do you think?
How are all three of the stories similar to and different from one
another? Consider how the cultural differences tinge the teachings.
How do you react to the prospect of laboring to create something the
results of which are unknown to you?
Doreen
posted by Doreen Ellen Bell-Dotan, Tzfat @ 2:58 AM
<< Home