In this blog I will tell you the story of the three monks,
which is a well-known fairy tale in China. But it will be a little different
from the one I was told when I was a child.
Once upon a time, there was a temple on the top of a
hill. In the temple, there was a tall monk who lived a simple and happy life. Every
day he needed to haul two buckets of water up the hill from the foot of the
mountain. Life was quiet and peaceful then.
 |
| the tall monk hauling two buckets of water |
One day, a short monk passed by the temple. He
appreciated the beautiful view of the mountain and asked to live here, and the
tall monk agreed.
However when the short monk asked for some water to drink, the tall monk refused. He said it was not an easy job to haul water up the mountain. If the short monk wanted to drink water, he had to haul water by himself and share the water with him.
The short monk refused to do so because he was too short
to haul water by himself, and he insisted that the tall monk should share the
water with him because he was the guest.
They began to quarrel and neither of them wanted to compromise
since they were both of egoistic character who stuck to their own ideas that
the other person should serve for him.
At the end of first day, neither of them went down the
hill to haul water so there was no water to drink.
The next day, they were so thirsty that they finally
agreed to share the job with each other. But the pole that the tall monk used
to haul water is only long enough for one bucket if the job was shared by two persons.
So now they had to haul water twice instead of once to get the previous two
buckets of water. Both of them felt unhappy about it but still had to
accept that.
 |
| the tall and short monks sharing their job |
Several days later, there came another fat monk. He was
impressed by the beautiful sky over the mountain and decided to live in the
temple as well.
The short and the tall monk agreed.
However when the fat monk asked two fellows to get some
water for him, the faces of short and tall monks turned green. The tall monk
put the bucket aside and said that if the fat monk wanted to drink water, he
had to haul water by himself or haul it with the short monk and then share the
water with him.
The short monk disagreed and protested that he was the
weakest monk and the job should be done by the two other fellows.
Since there was only one carry pole which could be
carried by maximally 2 persons, they couldn’t share the work anymore. Later
they fell into a bitter quarrel.
 |
| three monks falling into a terrible fight |
They kept pointing out other two’s selfishness and repeated their own excuses for not taking this job again and again. Their ego prevented them from considering other possible options and working out the best solution that the three of them could accept
|
Soon the interpersonal conflict intensified. Gradually the
conflict started to become aggressive since neither of the three wanted to give
in. During this conflict, the monks started getting angry and impatient with
each other. Therefore curses were exchanged and they started raising their
voices. They were so engrossed in their little conflict that they thoroughly
forgot to haul the water first.
Unfortunately at that night the temple caught fire and
burned everything they had. The poor monks didn’t have a drip of water to put
out the fire and save their belongings. Finally they had to leave the temple,
bankrupted.
 |
| three monks leaving the temple, bankrupted |
After reading this story, my friends, what do you think of
these three monks who could have avoided this disaster, and what solution could
you give to resolve this unfortunate interpersonal conflict?
Reference: http://loshinicantstoptalking.blogspot.sg/
Hi Ding Ding,
ReplyDeleteI would be interested to hear the other variations of this folklore because I think different versions would convey a slightly different moral lesson. I feel that this folklore is a good analogy to describe interpersonal conflict because all three monks had the same problem - they were all pessimistic complainers and they looked only to their self-interest. With such similar traits, it would be difficult for them to get along well with each other. The tall monk was unwilling to share the water he hauled with great effort; the short monk felt he should be treated better because he was the guest and also the weakest; and the fat monk wanted water to drink without contributing in any way.
The tall monk was unable to adapt to change when the short monk came to join him on the mountain as all he wanted was to proceed on with his life as usual. This isn’t to say he was wrong but he could have stated his conditions clearly to the short monk before permitting him to stay on the mountain; and likewise when the third monk decided to join them on the mountain. By communicating their ideas and laying the boundaries right at the start, they can decide on the duties and expectations of each other, which could have minimised the tension that arose. In addition, it was also very unfair of the tall monk to tell the other two monks that the water they drew had to be shared with him while he was unwilling to share the water he hauled with anybody else. This wasn’t a fair exchange.
All in all, I would think the monks were only interested in fulfilling their personal obligations. The bitterness they harboured against one another could have been avoided if the tall monk had been more discerning of the cohabitants before agreeing to let them stay in the temple. Having the wisdom to make this decision would definitely have helped the tall monk in avoiding this issue. Nonetheless, he could have showed more compassion towards the other two monks by setting an example and this might influence them to do likewise. Perhaps the way the monks conveyed their messages were not tactful enough; the harshness of their tone could have implied that one of them was superior or maybe just ignorant of the other person’s lamentations. This would have led to their defensive attitudes and thus an eventual conflict.
Had they identified their personal strengths, the work could have been distributed more evenly and everyone would benefit. The load of the water could be shared by two of the monks with similar heights to maximise their efficiency while the third monk can focus on another area which requires attention. They might also have been overly consumed by the water issue and have thus overlooked some other essential problems. Therefore leveraging on the strengths of each other would have allowed them to be more productive and the mood would have been more positive. Being a more active listener to the other monks and being more encouraging to each other would have also helped them a great deal in improving their relationships.
Hi Ronald,
DeleteThanks for reading and commenting on my post.
It is kind of you to analyse the character of 3 monks and offer lots of suggestions including
1.Communicating their ideas and laying the boundaries right at the start
2.showing more compassion towards the other two monks by setting an example
3. The load of the water could be shared by two of the monks with similar heights to maximise their efficiency while the third monk can focus on another area
A good suggestion I especially notice is that "by identifying their personal strengths the work could have been distributed more evenly". This is exactly my solution to this problem. In consideration of efficiency, the best way is supposed to be the tall monk hauling 2 buckets of water and the fat and the short haul twice alternately.
Your advice is very practical and I will share it with my Chinese friends. I hope that there will be a happy ending for the story.
Hi Ding Ding,
ReplyDeleteYour post is really enjoyable due to the vivid pictures and the interesting folk story. When I was in primary school, I used to learn a similar folk story about selfishness and bigotry. Long time ago, there were a black goat and a white goat wanted to across a bamboo bridge. The bridge was too narrow that there was only one can cross at a time. None of the two goats compromised the other. They butted each other at the middle of the bridge and both dropped into the river.
Although selfishness is a crucial factor leads to interpersonal conflict, I think the main reason is the bigoted and aggressive mood. At first, a person is too selfishness to share the interests and responsibilities with the others, he initiates the conflict. After the fight occurs, he has no choice rather than continue fighting; otherwise, he would find himself fail, useless and cowardly. That is why the conflict is intensified more rapidly after a day.
For the monks, at the beginning they just felt lazy to haul the water uphill and felt it was unfair if they had to share with the others. I think it was just after the conflict occurred that they came up with more obstacles. They began to hate each other and dedicate not to give the others any interests. Although they were all thirsty, no one hauled the water because he thought if he did one time, the others would push the responsibility toward him and he would have to serve his "enemies." The laziness was not the main reason any more.
This conflict can be considered as nothing-or-everything issue. This can be a extremely hard to solve if every one is bigoted. Everyone wants to be the winner, so who will be the loser? On the other hand, the issue can be quite simple for professional communicator. If one of the monks took our module, he would learn to adapt and compromise the two others. He would say to the others that ok, this is our responsibility, all of us, both the host and the guesses, have to do anyway. It would be better if we share the works equally. Like Bernard said, they could distributed the works based on each personal strengths. Then the professional-communicating monk could begin the work first to show that he was honest and this was just a very simple problem. After that, the others would feel his generosity and start to follow his advice. The problem could be solved simply by compromise and generosity.
Here is a minor thing I found your post:
"If the short monk wanted to drink water, he had to haul water by himself and share the water with him."
--> the word "him" in "share the water with him" may cause a confusion of whether it indicates the tall monk or the short monk.
Similar problem with the following sentences:
"The short monk refused to do so because he was too short to haul water by himself, and he insisted that the tall monk should share the water with him because he was the guest."
"The tall monk put the bucket aside and said that if the fat monk wanted to drink water, he had to haul water by himself or haul it with the short monk and then share the water with him."
oh, I made a typo mistake. "Here is a minor thing I found your post" should be "Here is a minor thing I found in your post"
Delete:)
Hi Thao,
DeleteThank you for taking your time to read and comment on my blog post.I really appreciate this gesture.
Bigotry and pride blind their wills to communicate with each other. As things described in the similar folk story of goats, 3 monks don't work out the solution because their similar traits like sellfishness.
As you said, the problem could be solved simply by compromise and generosity, which I absolutely agree.
I have been experiencing this process since my middle school. At that time I didn't care much about others and was always pointing out their flaws directly which finally led to my failure to make friends.
Being generous to others and showing more favour towards others by setting an good example of myself really help me transit into another world where I can fit well and be involed in groups.I think it is applicable in this story too.
PS:I also notice that the word "him" may cause a confusion, but I don't know how to fix it. Hope Brad can give me some advice hoho.
Hey Ding Ding,
ReplyDeleteI really have nothing to add to what Ronald and Thao have said as they seem to have covered everything I wanted to say and so I can only reiterate the fact that if you are working in a team ,in order to avoid quarrels or miscommunications among-st other team members one must understand the strengths and weaknesses of their fellow members so that they can get their work done in an efficient manner
Hi Sai,
DeleteThank you for taking your time to read and comment on my blog post. I agree with you that teamwork is important and individuals should emphasize on it more when communicating with others.
Hi Ding Ding,
ReplyDeleteThis was a very nice post :) Since you used a story, I was quite engrossed right through. I just wondered something unrelated to this post but still wanted to share it. Though we grow old in terms of age, I don't think we grow out of these small stories we were told as a child. They have something special always :) Here, I think the tall monk was the source of the misunderstandings. He was too self-centred and I would not be wrong in using the word immature. Being the host, he could have been more compassionate. Being a group of 3, they could have just taken turns to haul the water. But they were all being lazy, self-absorbed and eventually paid the price for that. Even after the fire broke out, the 3 couldn't do anything because they were not used to being united while fighting a problem. They did not know what team work meant. Hence, all of them could have reacted to the issue in a mature manner and had a harmonious time together. They decided to stay there to enjoy the scenery but ended up having a disastrous time. Ironical. I noticed a few errors there such as,
1. Asked to live here >> asked to live THERE
2. neither of them wanted to compromise since they were both of egoistic character who stuck to their own ideas that the other person should serve for him >> neither of them wanted to compromise since both of them were egoistic (this is one better way to frame it)
3. when the fat monk asked two fellows to get some water for him>> when the fat monk asked THE two fellows to get some water for him.
Anyway, nice post Ding Ding :)
Hi Chandra,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that though we grow old in terms of age, we don't grow out of these small stories we were told as a child. This story is a mirror of immature human nature.
As you said, even after the fire broke out, the 3 couldn't do anything because they were not used to being united while fighting a problem. They did not know what team work meant.
It is a problem that modern human have to face. We are more connected by technology but at the same time separated physically, which will cause communication barricade. This is the age that we are more engrossed in Facebook and Twitter however forget people nearby.
And finally thank you for pointing out the errors in my blog.
I am happy to join you progress with you guys:)
Dear DingDing,
ReplyDeleteThis is a fine post, for a number of reasons. Like the other readers have mentioned, you source your info for this post from a traditional folk tale, which makes it easy to understand and quite entertaining.
You also tell the tale adroitly, with good language use, clear imagery and concise but complete explanations, and you even illustrate with pictures.
Finally, you provide a fairly well focused question at the end that requires your reader to give a specific response. I might have phrased that differently, but you are obviously making a great effort in rendering this from Chinese to English, and I appreciate that effort.
What is also great is that you have received lots of useful feedback from classmates. What an interesting discussion you've initiated!
Thanks for the hard work!