How can one be selfless?
Do you see the paradox in this question?
How can one ‘be’ ‘selfless’?
Being demands one’s presence and selflessness is, as we’ve seen in yesterday’s post, an act where the sense of self or the identity dissolves. In this context, there lies a paradox. This can be clarified by looking at a story of a Monk and a Lady whose home he visits daily to seek the alms.
And the moment he said “Aum Bhikshandehi”, they would come out and give the alms. However, the act of giving itself in each of the household was very different.
The Monk typically survives on the alms that he receives. Whatever he receives from as alms from typically the first five households, he eats that and survives on that. The Monk in this story was no different, but he ventured only to the three houses each day and those were fixed. Each of the three households gave him sufficient alms and he is comfortable with that. Each gave him either some grain, rice, boiled vegetables or some fresh fruits, and that sufficed him amply. All would promptly be prepared by 6.30 AM when the Monk would go seeking the alms. And the moment he said “Aum Bhikshandehi”, they would come out and give the alms. However, the act of giving itself in each of the household was very different.
Whenever the monk visited the first house, he would receive the alms without a sense of emotions. The lady would come and put the offerings in his sack. There were no smiles or courteousness exchanged.
In the second house, the lady had a sense of joy in providing the alms. She took great pleasure in cooking a wholesome meal. She was proud of that fact that she is continuing her age-old tradition and custom of providing the alms.
In the third household, the lady came and gently placed the food packed in the Monk’s cloth sack. Her very act of gentleness came from a space of genuine love and compassion towards another human being.
The Monk made sure that he went to this household the last.
An act of giving alone does not make it a selfless act.
An act of giving alone does not make it a selfless act. When there is a lack of emotions, like in the first household, the lady was absent in the very act of giving the alms. Therefore, she was not ‘being’ selfless. When there is a sense of pride in conducting an act, like in the second household, the lady’s identity or ego took her over completely. Therefore, she was not being ‘selfless’. On contrary to the first two households, in the third household, the lady was fully involved in the act with her genuine love, care and compassion. She was fully being in the act but was never taken over by the ego or the pride of conducting an act. She thought, it was her duty and served the Monk without her sense of ‘self’. And, that is where her true being selfless came from. Therefore, it was natural for the Monk to visit this household before he completed the collection of his alms for the day.
She thought, it was her duty and served the Monk without her sense of ‘self’. And, that is where her true being selfless came from.
THIRTEEN is a platform for sharing six blogs and a podcast every week. For more such daily readings and podcasts, subscribe us here and receive a free weekly workbook.
At THIRTEEN we intend to urge our readers to write each morning as a process of catharsis. Such kind of daily writing lightens our mind and allows us to be at ease and most importantly comfortable with ourselves! If you like our content, we request you to share this with your colleagues, friends and family.
Comments