I have chosen this week’s poem as a reminder that we may all see the same person, thing or event in our own ways. It is John Godfrey Saxe’s “The Blind Men and the Elephant”.
It was six men of Indostan, to learning much inclined,
John Godfrey Saxe (1816—1887)
who went to see the elephant (Though all of them were blind),
that each by observation, might satisfy his mind.
Poem 392. The Blind Men and the Elephant
It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation,
Might satisfy his mind.
The first approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
“God bless me! but the Elephant
is very like a wall!”
The second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried: “Ho! what have we here,
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me ‘tis mighty clear,
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!”
The third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
“I see,” quoth he, “The Elephant
Is very like a snake!”
The fourth reached out his eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
“What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain,” quoth he;
“’Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree.”
The fifth, who chanced to touch the ear
Said; “E’en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!”
The sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
“I see,” quoth he, “the Elephant
Is very like a rope!”
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right
And all were in the wrong!
So, oft in theologic wars
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
John Godfrey Saxe adapted a parable from the Indian sub-continent in writing this poem, which introduced the story to western audiences. He deftly tells the tale of the six wise men who encounter this legendary beast: each in his turn forms his own idea of the beast and stoutly defends it against the others’ claims. The story is first found in the Buddhist text Tittha Sutta, dating to around 500 BCE, so the story is old but the moral remains relevant. Saxe added the last stanza which introduces the idea of men arguing about the nature of God without any real idea of His nature.
The poem introduces the six blind sages who decide to go “to see the Elephant.” Each seizes a different part of the animal and makes a different (and conflicting) conjecture as to its nature: one imagines the animal to be like a wall, another disputes that it is like a snake, and so on. Each is convinced his opinion is correct and not one of the others’ has any validity, and so they argue incessantly and forcefully but not convincingly enough to change the others’ views.
Saxe extends the metaphor to Christianity, though it applies to our modern and more secular world just as easily and we frequently see news items that largely derive from one side’s inability to see the world in a different light. Everyone has their own concept of reality which may reflect the truth to a greater or lesser extent but nobody grasps the actual truth.
This reminds me of Agatha Christie’s Poirot novel Five Little Pigs in which the murder is described by five different witnesses (the ‘Five Little Pigs’ as in the nursery rhyme) according to their own views and prejudices and Poirot has to determine the truth of the matter by weighing up the evidence as distinct from the interpretation. This is a common theme in detective stories: the difficulty lies not in the facts, but in how they are twisted by each witness to suit their world view. How far this is true in real life can be judged from the comments sections on many Facebook posts where people who have no conception of the event, person or thing they are commenting on nonetheless feel free to peddle their opinions to all and sundry. Small wonder that news reports of notorious or very public crimes are frequently accompanied by appeals from the police to restrain comment on social media.
I like this poem because the moral it teaches remains true however it is dressed, whether as a Buddhist parable, a Christian exhortation or a general admonition: the views of others may be as valid and true as our own, and we have no monopoly on the truth.
There is a charming performance (and animation) by Barbara Zampelli on YouTube, so I have chosen that.