A traveller hired a donkey to convey him to a distant place. The day being intensely hot, and the sun shining in its strength, the traveller stopped to rest, and sought shelter from the heat under the shadow of the donkey. As this afforded only protection for one, and as the traveller and the owner of the donkey both claimed it, a violent dispute arose between them as to which of them had the right to the shadow. The owner maintained that he had hired out the donkey only, and not his shadow. The traveller asserted that he had, with the hire of the donkey, hired his shadow also. The quarrel proceeded from words to blows, and while the men fought, the donkey galloped off.
What does this old folk story mean to you?
I think the moral value of the story is that our egos and selfishness can cause us to lose sight of the solution of the problem, and can cause the problem to much bigger than what it was. In my humble opinion, nobody was wrong. The traveler had a right to sought shelter from the heat under the shadow of the donkey because he had paid the owner. The owner also had a right of the shadow because well…he owned it. The quarrel can easily be avoided if the owner and the traveler would focus less on their difference and more on their similarities; they both needed shelter from the sun. An easy solution that I came up with, would be if they take turns, the owner can rest up first for a couple of minutes and the traveler could be patient for a while and wait.
ReplyDeleteWouldn’t it be funny if the reason the donkey galloped of is because he was just too annoyed by their quarrel? I know it’s impossible but thinking about it makes me smile.
Ricky wrote: "I think the moral value of the story is that our egos and selfishness can cause us to lose sight of the solution of the problem, and can cause the problem to much bigger than what it was."
DeleteCompare yours to mine:
EITHER: "I think the moral value of the story is that our egos and selfishness can cause us to lose sight of the solution to a problem and can cause the problem to become much bigger than what it was."
OR: "I think the moral value of the story is that our egos and selfishness can cause us to lose sight of the solution to a problem, and this can cause the problem to become much bigger than what it was."
Note what I did with the comma (among other things).
thanks sir! I'll make sure I'll do better next time
DeleteI think the moral value of the story is sometimes people’s different sight of something can lead to an argument. In this case, I think neither the traveler nor the owner is wrong. The problem is just they have different opinion and none of them wants to solve the problem nicely. Since there is no clear agreement from the beginning of the transaction regarding the who the donkey’s shadow belongs to, they could have solved the problem by dividing the shadow so that each of them could have half of the shadow and half of the sun heat. In conclusion, we learn from the story that we should unify our view with other view when it comes to doing something that involves more than one person. We also learn that to find a solution to a problem, we should calm down and we should not involve physical act to it.
ReplyDeleteThis is very well expressed.
DeleteI think, this folk story depicts how certain individuals conduct themselves in a workplace environment, more specifically how they dismiss their customers’ complaints with a mere argument that they’re also humans who are bound to make mistakes, and therefore won’t fix themselves by the end of the day. These individuals are the people who post on their social media how crappy their experience in the workplace was, and then believing that as employees, their customers should have treated them better. In my opinion, the folk story above reflected basically just that. The arguing traveller represents the customer, the donkey’s owner represents the employee, while the donkey represents any form of complaint that the customer has towards the product or service that the employee’s company has handed to him/her. Due to the negative attitude that the owner had towards what the traveller had to say, the heated situation was made worse, making the donkey taking a step back and galloped off. The leaving donkey could symbolically be interpreted as a problem, or in this case a complaint, that grew to become a much bigger and more difficult complication which could’ve been easily dealt with when it wasn’t such a pimple in the face. With no donkey, the traveller will have to walk to reach his destination while the owner will have to go look for his donkey. With a complaint unattended or dismissed poorly, the employee will have to meet his/her manager and accept a punishment while the customer will be forced to wait for a refund or something else from the company that can make him/her forgive them for the inconveniences they might have caused.
ReplyDeleteIn my perspective, the story tells us not to argue over something as simple as shelter to cool off. They fight over something so trivial that I think it could be easily solved if they are not too hot-headed and too tired to think properly and rationally. They could just share the shadows together; they could take turns. But instead, anger and impatient get the best of both of them, and it leads them to unnecessary bickering. They even fight physically and let the donkey, their source of shelter, run away. Besides, it also tells us another important thing: to have self-control in every situation. I think it’s essential to be able to not get carried away by any conditions as it could lead to unwanted situations. Self-control is to keep our emotions under control so that we could make rational decisions and not based on irrational feeling that’s suddenly emerged.
ReplyDeleteHelga wrote: "They fight over something so trivial that I think it could be easily solved if they are not too hot-headed and too tired to think properly and rationally."
DeleteThe word "it" doesn't belong in your sentence.
Also, after "could" and "if", "they are not too hot-headed" should be "they were not too hot-headed", surely?
In my perspective, from what I’m seeing is this is a really really bad business agreement. This is an example of a business case that should be discussed in our leaderless group discussion. In my opinion, in business, we need to make everything as clearly as possible and leaving a grey mark that could trigger a conflict, either from the provider and user or maybe for both of the company that having an agreement. Both of the traveler and the owner is not wrong. They have they argument about it and both of them are having an equally strong argument. They both need the donkey at the first place, the owner need it to earn his income by renting the donkey and the traveler need it to accompany him through out his journey. They both lose their basic needs due to some stupid argument. If we apply this in a business, first, as I mentioned in the above that we need to make thing as clearly as possible and leaving a grey mark. Second, we need to be wiser, we need to remember the first reason of why we do business, and if we confronting something like that, we can both take turns so that everyone happy and we achieved our main goal. Be wiser, sympathy, caring, and be clever. That’s according to me, are a few of the basic thing that we need to do so we can achieve our goals more easily and having a trust worthy and loyal partner.
ReplyDeleteIn my interpretation, the story shows us about human natural behavior. Human tend to be egocentric and self- centered. They will put themselves first before anyone else. It can be symbolized by the action done by the traveler and the owner of the donkey. They argued on the right to use the donkey’s shadow as a protection from the heat. It shows that human will not budge. In my opinion, arguing will not solve any problem in fact it may cause another problem. I believe that in order to solve a problem we need to discuss in a democratic way where all opinions are taken into a consideration. Hence, a win- win situation will be achieved. In this story, the traveler and the owner may share the donkey’s shadow even though the protection is not optimal or they can search for a better shelter together. Therefore, there will be no argument and they will maintain a good relationship.
ReplyDeleteDita wrote: "The story shows us about human natural behavior."
DeleteThis is the sentence pattern: SUBJECT shows [someone, in this case = "us"] NOUN [i.e. the thing that is shown]. So...
"The story shows us something about human natural behavior."
Is the word "natural" necessary?
This folk story tells us that people does argue a lot in a such common thing. We usually argue with others because of one, our thoughts aren’t them same as the other, or two, we as a human being want to get the leisure that we can afford by argue who is better. The one that lost will surely stepdown because their arguments aren’t that strong enough to beat the winner. But in this case greedy people will do anything to win until one got to the corner where they can’t argue anymore, with all that, people who hears or got into a situation with them will eventually leave because it’s not important. That’s why if you peek a person to be by your side, please consider to chose the one that do have that feeling to know the situations between those who really have the rights to be using the facilities in general.
ReplyDeleteThis story is exciting because this story is relate to reality life and could be a moral lesson for us. This problem happened because the traveller and the donkey’s owner don’t want to relent on each other and insisted on their own will without thinking about each other. At the end, they only fight and wasting their time. This fight will not happen and they both could still enjoy the shadow if they think rationally and don’t put anger in their decision. The best solution is if they take turn to use the shadow fairly, for example the traveler use it for 10 minutes, and another 10 minutes for the donkey’s owner. That solution will be a lot better than to quarrel at each other. This story can teach us to be patient with each other, think rationally not emotionally, respect and care for people around you. When we can put this characters to our life, we will have a better life and better environment around us.
ReplyDeleteThis folklore reminds me of a video I once watch on YouTube. We can argue about who has ownership of the donkey's shadow, and both arguments have valid points. One could argue that the traveler who hired the donkey has momentary ownership of the donkey, and since the donkey has ownership of its shadow, the traveler has, in turn, ownership of the shadow. Another would argue that the donkey and its shadow are two completely different things, and hiring one does not necessarily mean owning the other.
ReplyDeleteBut I recall the video I mentioned earlier. The video is about Zen Koans, ancient Buddhist philosophical enigmas that cannot be explained with simple explanations, designed to train us to accept mysteries and asks, “Why do we need to know”. One could say that the traveler has rights to the shadow because he has rights to the donkey, or that he only has rights to the donkey and not the shadow. But I interpret that as the thoughts in our heads on how we interpret this dilemma. One argues of the literal definition, while the other seeks a much deeper understanding.
The interpretations of what we see in this example is one without a simple explanation, or one in general. The climax and resolution of this story when the two men argue while the donkey gallops away, is a metaphor on how our contradicting opinions divide and harm us. The story underlines that our ego over which one of us deserves a benefit, will result in none receiving anything.
Anyone can argue what over what, but from what I’ve seen in this passage, the differing opinions and the arguments of the two men is nothing more than excuses, which leads to the donkey galloping away as a punishment for their ego and selfishness.
This folk story actually reminds me of the nature that all humans have, greed. Mentioned in the story above, both the owner of the donkey, and the traveller, argued about simple thing that let them into serious problem. As a result, from an attitude that is less commendable can cause unexpected problems, from which initially only trivial problems, until eventually become an increasingly large problem. This made me aware of how important for human to succumb between each other, or it could be by evenly dividing the shadow, in case to avoid fighting. This story also makes us aware that everyone's thoughts are different, and because of that, it doesn't mean that people have to fight because they have different opinions. Besides, fighting will not solve the problem and only waste time .The better solution is to try to understand each other, think rationally, and do not put anger while trying to solve something.
ReplyDeleteI think this story has hidden and deep meaning behind it. From this story, that traveller and the owner of the donkey are representing us in our daily life. Sometimes in our life we have conflict between each other and thus seperating us from our beautiful relationship and when we realize it, it is too late. In the start of the story the traveller had an agreement with the owner over a donkey, this is representing when we start an agreement with other people which is a relationship symbolized as a donkey in that story. But as time goes by, when we have a problem or conflict which represented as the heat of the sun, we will start to hide behind our relationship to push other people to give in. Therefore we will argue with each other, and if noone wants to give in to maintain the relationship, they will broke their own relationship. At the end they will realize how dumb they are to waste such a beautiful relationship over some selfish ego to have that feeling of winning over our friend in argument or something.
ReplyDeleteIt is normal for people to fight over a common thing. In this case, it’s the greed on both sides of two people who made the donkey galloped off. From a business perspective, we can interpret the owner of the donkey as the seller and the traveller as the buyer. It is certainly wrong for the seller to decline the customer’s choice to rest on the donkey’s shadow, as complaints may rise up from this customer, making the business look bad, resulting other people to refuse to hire his/her donkey. Also, the seller seemed to have just made the fact that the shadow isn’t part of the hire, due to the hot weather which he hadn’t predicted/known before. In a social perspective, it is certainly not human for both the traveller and owner to have the shadow on their own. This inhuman behaviour leads to a battle of greed, which in the end, doesn’t solve the problem at all. There should be an alternative decision that comforts both the traveller and owner, such as sharing the shadow together, or maybe taking turns on the shadow if it is too small to fit two people.
ReplyDeleteI think this folk story illustrates how human nature really is all in the right places. Because although every problem has its own way out and I believe the fact that it could’ve been solved nicely without any hassle, some people just won’t do it that way. Yes I said “won’t” because it is our choice whether or not we solve the problem based on manners or by violence, either physically or verbally, or maybe both. But we can’t deny the fact that some people are so selfish that they don’t care about other people, all they care about is themselves. They always ask for more and more. Nothing is ever good enough. As in this case, between the traveler and the donkey owner, if only they could discuss and negotiate properly, the conflict would not occur in the first place. They could’ve talked it out and they could’ve just take turns. This story just blew my mind away, just how the donkey managed to escape the two. Even an animal that obviously doesn’t have behavioral ethics managed to find a way out to its problem.
ReplyDeleteI wrote "if only they could discuss and negotiate properly, the conflict would not occur in the first place", I should've wrote "if only they discussed and negotiated properly, the conflict would've not occurred in the first place"
DeleteAfter I read the story, what has come in my mind is the meaning of sharing. Both of the men were too selfish. They didn’t care with each other. The owner of the donkey had a reason that the traveler only rent for the donkey, not the shadow. The traveler replied that by hiring the donkey he was able to use its shadow. Unfortunately, the donkey ran away while they were seriously arguing with each other for the rights of the shadow of a donkey. We knew that their selfishness managed to grow a strong opinion which was really good only for each of them, not for both of them. Lets imagine if they wanted to lower their ego. They wouldn’t argue with each other, they would share the shadow so that they could have the same benefit, and the wouldn’t lose a donkey which was very helpful for both of them. That old folk story told us the real value of sharing with each other. We often forget to share with the others. While we are arguing for the individual benefit, we might lose the real value of the thing that we are arguing. We should take at least a lesson from this story. Share for the common benefit.
ReplyDeleteFrom my analysis the story is a perfect example how too much greed will make everyone lose something. In the story, both the owner’s and the traveler are fighting for the right of the donkey shadow. In the end the donkey galloped off and neither of them get to have the shadow of the donkey. But greediness is something that human and many animals have. Greediness is very important human evolution to survive in the world. With greed, we motivated stock more food so we prepare for future event when we don’t have any food. Although too much greediness certainly will cause many trouble and chaos. When someone’s has too much greed for power, they will do whatever it takes to gain more power. So, we can learn from the story that we as a person mustn’t too greedy and try to find solution that can stop any further conflict.
ReplyDeleteThe story teaches me about the importance of sharing. Those two men, traveller and the owner, are scrambling on whose the one that can use the donkey's shadow to protect themselves. The story tells that the donkey's shadow can only provide a protection for one. In my opinion, both of them could've gotten the protection by using the donkey's shadow alternately. So for instance, traveller use the shadow for 15 minutes, and then after that it's the owner's turn, and so on. Their quarrel is really unnecessary, especially knowing that they both adults. The traveller and the donkey owner are being greedy and they lose their precious possession: their donkey. From this we can learn that if we are being greedy, constantly focusing on something that we don't have, and do not appreciate things that we have (by sharing some of the things that we have to those in need), we might lose everything that we've had, like in the folklore it shows the donkey galloped off ant the end, leaving the traveller and the owner stranded.
ReplyDeleteThis actually brings back my memory to my kindergarten life, when this old folktale was told by my teacher during the class. I was told that the moral value of this story is that us as a human being, we should not be greedy. And now I just realized, that a simple folktale has a very meaningful moral values that is relatable to some currently happening situation. This story shows that both the traveler and the owner of the donkey are just being selfish as they only care about themselves. As a human who has brain to think rationally and logically, of course the traveler and the owner want to bring out their personal reason which they think is true based on their own opinion. Relating to the real life, we often get into a situation where we should give our opinion and also to respect others. Now we know that based on the ending of the story, it is not good to argue hot-headedly over problems, big or even small ones. We should be prepared to have many ways to solve a problem, and of course not involving physical actions too.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion there is something to say for both the opinion of the traveller as for the opinion of the owner. I also don’t think that there is an ideal solution, so they just have to compromise. Maybe they should share the space with shadow or sit there in shifts. Of course the moral of this story is that because of our egos we lose track of the real problem. Consequently the problem will only become bigger, in this case because the donkey decided to move away from the two people. To avoid these kind of situations in the first place, people should make agreements about these subjects as well, but they should agree with each other before they actually depart. When they agreed on this earlier, there was no reason for this problem to occur. One of them could have simple brought a parasol or anything like that and everyone would have lived happily ever after.
This folk story actually reflects a lot about the human nature of behavior. Unconsciously, we, humans are very greedy. We tend to prioritize our own desires and wishes rather than considering what others really need and that we are all competitive in nature, we like to be better at something than others and would only be satisfied if we can actually obtain what we want. It often doesn’t matter if we have to fight over trivial matters with others as long as it contents our pride. In my opinion, this folk story is a very simple example to convey the message that greed and quarrel over trivial matters will only hinder us from realizing the real, important matters. When in fact it would be much simpler if we could just share things and try to understand each other.
ReplyDeleteTo be a good person for ourselves and for others and for the society, we should be a caring person that is not selfish, not greedy and not forcing our will. From this story, we could see that greediness and selfishness will not bring any good to us. This can be seen from the donkey’s owner and traveler that quarreled around just to scramble some shady spot. At the end, they were just quarrelling and didn’t get the spot at all. If they had just been a cool down persons, talk about it and find a solution, it will get so much better for them. They could just share the same amount of time to get the spot and take a fair turn of it. But it is a shame that they took their ego much more than their cold heads. In conclusion, we have to see our problem with a cold head so that we could find a good solution for it.
ReplyDeleteI think the story tells us that we as a human does not want to succumb and always have our egos bigger than anything. We always feel like we are the only one who is right. It is a human nature, actually. Like in the story, both the traveler and the owner don’t want to think of any good solution together because they feel like each of them is the correct one. And another problem is that sometime, in our life we like to exaggerate something simple and it becomes something big. When we are in an argument with someone, even just because a small cause or problem, if we cannot control our ego or selfishness or emotion, we would move our words into a real physical violence. Whereas, doing that thing, won’t make any better and won’t give any good solutions. So, I think, the moral story that we can get is that we have to muffle our big egos and if we have a different thought about something, try to finish it nicely without involving a violence in it.
ReplyDeleteThe message that I received from the old folk story of “The Donkey and Its Shadow” is about the inability to control one’s emotion when troubles are in the way. In the story, you can see that both sides (the traveler and the owner of the donkey) have failed to control their emotion when they are faced with a problem, which is the heat of the sun. In response to the problem, both sides are eventually led into a heated argument regarding who has the right to shade against the heat of the sun using the donkey’s shadow. I think if they were to control their emotion better than what’s shown in the story, they could come up with a solution that benefits each of them. One possible solution is taking turns to who gets to sit on the shadow, which involved sacrificing themselves to be on the hot sun and also sharing with each other. The other possible solution is splitting the shaded area where both of them receive half of the shading from the sun and the other half of them do not. Both solutions require them to share and give up something in order to fulfill others’ need, which is something that the story is teaching its readers.
ReplyDeleteOne value that we can clearly see from this old folk story is that every people must have their own perspective towards any conditions that they faced. And sometimes that different perspective may lead people into an argument or even into a conflict. Well, I guess this kind of issue is commonly happened in our daily life. But one thing for sure, we should realize since every people have different perspective, we should learn how to respect that differences in order to avoid a conflict. Yet however, some people still driven by their ego which then lead them to become not respect to the other person’s argument and resulting a conflict. In this case, the best way to avoid the conflict is to create an agreement first between the people. By that, the people will start to know what are things that they can have and things that they can’t have.
ReplyDeleteWhat happen in the story was the owner and the traveler repeatedly arguing on who will get the whole shadow. They were stuck in the thought of whether hiring the donkey means hiring the shadows as well or vice versa. It then ended up with the donkey galloping them off. People have different opinions and that’s okay. Right or wrong is just a matter of seeing in a different perspective. It is always good to have a dispute on which decision to be taken to get through a problem, but one thing to be remembered: it has to have a solution. The final result might not fulfill both interest, but at least the problem is solved. Do it in a cool head. Always remember the goal; why are you debating in the first place. Don’t let your ‘donkey’ disappear by time as you are in an argument. Once both sides stonewalled with each other’s argument, try another option. The problem in the story has an easy solution, which is to share the shadow; both will get the benefit with no loss at all.
ReplyDeleteThis story actually reminded me of my childhood. Back when i was five years old, me and my brother, who was seven at that time, had a gaming console that we shared. I got the console from my fourth birthday, but my parents gave the controller to my brother. Yes, this is actually a strategy made by my parents to teach us how to share. The problem was the plan itself backfired. One day me and my brother came across this single player game where I, having the full rights of the console, wanted to play first. But my brother wanted to play first as well, because he believed that him owning the controller made him have the same rights as me. we ended up having a fist fight, and no I didn’t win. Because of that my parents banned us from playing the console for a whole month. At the end of the day, people may have different perspective but the easiest solution is through sharing.
ReplyDeleteI think that this old folk does reflects human behavior daily. The behavior of both men mentioned in the old folk is not only greedy, but also close-minded. Same like what lots of people still do until this day, they argued because of small things without thinking further to find its solution. Being a close-minded person these days are the cancer of community and also popularly the reason of a strife. They tend to push their understandings to other people and reject other thoughts which could have been a path to a better solution. If you ask me, who deserves to be in the shadow, I would say both of them deserves to be in the shadow. Both men should have been in the shadow if they stray away their greediness and prioritize a way out. They could divide the shadow and I surely think they both will fit in the shadow of the donkey preventing the burning sun.
ReplyDeleteI personally think that this folk story is trying to tell people not to be so egoistic. In the story, we can see that each character only think about themselves, including the donkey. In this case we cannot define who is wrong. Both sides have the right to claim the shadows. I think that violent dispute between the traveler and the owner can be avoided if only one of them could find the agreement that benefit both sides. If one of them could try to persuade the other to share the shadows, it would benefit both of them even though it’s not comfortable. If only they could do that, they wouldn’t lose the only think they were trying to claim, which is the donkey. The moral value of this story should be implemented in society nowadays. A lot of people still think merely about themselves. We all should learn how to care for both ourselves and others. Based on the story, both sides didn’t think about the donkey at all. They were not thinking about the possibility of the donkey to run away. In conclusion, we also should learn how to ensure our future. What I mean by ensuring our future in this case is how we should focus on what could be done that will ensure our benefit in the meantime and in the future.
ReplyDeleteThe moral story of this folk story is that we shouldn’t argue on something that is not important before losing something that is more important. As it is stated in the story above, the argument between the owner and the traveller that last pretty long has caused the donkey to galloped off, leaving both of them. If you think about it, it would be more difficult for the both owner and traveller to continue their journey. Besides, the donkey’s shadow will only emerge when the sun’s shine strikes the donkey. Therefore, the owner and the traveller’s argument were actually very pointless. In my opinion, the story teaches us to avoid doing something that we will regret in the future. It is very important to be able to prioritize things in life. There may be a lot of different problems, but we have to know which one is worth the time.
ReplyDeleteI think the message behind this tale is that anger and selfishness destroy ourselves and our surrounding. The tale talks about how two man scrambled around just to find a shelter that would only fit one person. The problem occurred when the two of them started being selfish. If they didn’t scramble and just took turns instead, it would’ve been enough for the both of them to rest in a shelter. But they didn’t, instead they scrambled around and fought, which in turn would just waste their time being outside and perhaps in the end they both won’t get shelter at all. It is natural for us human to be selfish, because we’re all born with that trait (or mindset), but, what we should do is to control our selfishness to an extent and be a wise human being that is capable of thinking critically and care for other people. On the other note, we all need to follow an important life principle which is: treat others the way you want to be treated!
ReplyDeleteI remember reading this short folk story in school, maybe when I was in elementary. I think this story explains about the problem we face even nowadays, in a unique way. It tells us about the human behaviour. Us humans are usually selfish and egoistic, since we each have a different point of view we always automatically sees the other’s as something that is wrong; as a result, we fight. Though, sometimes, no one is at fault and there’s always a solution. In this story, it also tells us how when we are too busy quarrelling over something, we sometimes lose the actual solution along the way.
ReplyDeleteI think I saw a riddle that is similar to this, where we are asked who is right and who is wrong. The answer actually says that since the traveller only hired the donkey, he should also pay a ‘rent’ for his shadow since it doesn’t come with it.
The donkey and its shadow, and old pre-school fable that I haven’t hear in such a long time, this old folk story actually teaches many kids about quite an important moral value.
ReplyDeleteBoth the traveller and the donkey owner were fighting over something insubstantial (in this case the donkey shadow) during their dispute, they lose sight of the thing that is more important and substantial (in this case the donkey) because they were too busy fighting amongst themselves about who claim the rightful ownership of something so trivial. If only they were wise enough, the traveller could have continued the journey on the donkey that he has paid while the owner could hide beneath its shadow while walking.
So, in conclusion, this old folk tale teaches me and a lot of kids back in pre-school that while you were chasing over something so trivial, you might lose sight of things that are more important. That’s why you have to look at the bigger picture.