From Long Ago
A curriculum for middle elementary grades by Dan Harper, v. 2.0
Copyright (c) 2014-2024 Dan Harper
This is the first story in the curriculum because it raises one of the central questions we’ll be addressing in the curriculum: How can we know what is true?
The Tale of the Dhak Tree
One day, four of Buddha’s followers asked how they might learn to meditate. Buddha taught each one a different form of meditation. Each one of the four practiced their different kinds of meditation so well that they each achieved Enlightenment.
The four of them then got into an argument, because each one was sure that theirs was the best form of meditation. At they decided to ask Buddha. They “Each of us has achieved Enlightenment, but we each used a different type of meditation. How could this be?”
Buddha said, “It is like the four brothers who saw the dhak tree. Let me tell you that story.”
In ancient times, Bramadatta, the King of Benares, had four sons.
One day, the four sons sent for a charioteer and said, “We want to see a dhak tree [butea frondosa]. Show us one!”
“Very well, I will,” the charioteer replied. “I’ll begin by showing the eldest son.” It was early in the spring, and he took the eldest in his chariot to the forest. He showed eldest son the dhak tree when the buds had not yet begun to swell, and the tree looked dead.
Now the other sons wanted to go see the dhak tree. But the charioteer told them they had to wait until he had free time.
Three weeks later, the charioteer said, “Now I have time for me to bring the second eldest son to see the dhak tree.” So he brought the second son to the forest. Now the dhak tree was entirely covered with beautiful reddish-orange flowers.
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International, by Gutam2000, cropped and edited for clarity.
Another three weeks passed before the charioteer said he had time to go to the forest. So he brought the third son to see the dhak tree. Now the flowers were gone and the tree was covered with leaves.
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International by Aftabbanoori, cropped and edited for clarity.
Many weeks passed, and the charioteer kept saying he was not able to bring the fourth son to the forest. The fourth son waited and waited until at last he could wait no more. So the charioteer told him to get into the chariot, and took him to the forest. Now the dhak tree when it was covered with long brownish-green seed-pods.
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported by J.M.Garg, photo cropped and edited for clarity.
When at last all the brothers had seen the dhak tree, they sat down together and talked about what the dhak tree was like.
The first brother answered, “It’s just a bunch of dead twigs.”
And the second brother said, “No, it’s reddish-orange, the same color as fresh meat.”
And the third brother said, “No, it’s entirely green with leaves like a banyan tree.”
And the fourth brother said, “No, it looks just like an acacia tree with its long seed pods.”
None of them liked the answers the other gave. So they ran to find their father.
“Father,” they asked, “tell us, what is the dhak tree like?”
“You have all seen the tree,” the king said. “You tell me what it’s like.”
The four brothers gave the king their four different answers.
“You have all seen the tree,” said the king. “But when the charioteer showed you the tree, you didn’t ask him what the tree looked like at other times of the year. This is where your mistake lies.” And the king recited this poem:
Each of you went to see the tree,
But you did not think carefully:
You did not ask to ask the charioteer
What it looks like through the year.
Having told this story, Buddha then spoke to his four followers. “These four brothers did not ask themselves what the tree looked like in different times of the year, and so they became confused. In just the same way, the four of you have become confused about what is true and right.” Then the Buddha gave another stanza for the king’s poem:
If you know truth, but imperfectly,
You’ll be unsure, like those four and their tree.
Source: Kimsukopama-Jataka, Jatka tale no. 248, in the Cowell translation (1911).
Session One: The Dhak Tree
I/ Opening
Take attendance.
Light chalice with these words and the associated hand motions: “We light this chalice to celebrate Unitarian Universalism: the church of the open mind, the helping hands, and the loving heart.”
Check-in: Go around circle. Each child and adult says his or her name, and then may say one good thing and one bad thing that has happened in the past week (anyone may pass).
II/ Read the story
Read the story to the children.
III/ Act out the story.
One of the principal ways we will help children internalize the story is to have them act it out. Some of the children may be familiar with how to act out a story, but others won’t be. This is a very simple story to act out, and a good way to help the class (children and adults!) to learn how to act out a story.
Ask: “Who are the characters in this story?” There are actually two stories: the framing story with the Buddha and his followers, and then the story the Buddha tells. In the framing story, the characters are the Buddha and his four followers. In the story the Buddha tells, the characters are the king, the four sons of the king, and the charioteer. The dhak tree can also be a character in this story.
Determine where the stage area will be. If there are any children who really don’t want to act, they can be part of the audience with you; you will sit facing the stage. (Perhaps one reluctant child would be willing to be the dhak tr4ee, as they don’t have to do anything.)
The lead teacher reads the story, prompting actors as needed to act out their parts. Actors do not have to repeat dialogue (although some of them may want to do so). The lead teacher may wish to simplify the story on the fly, to make it easier to act out.
If you have a lot of children, you may want to act out the story twice, with different sets of lead actors each time. If you don’t have many children, the four followers of Buddha can play the four sons, and Buddha play the king (which is the obvious point the story is trying to make).
It would be great if you took photos of this story with your phone or a digital camera. Print out these photos, and post the best ones on the class bulletin board to remind the children of this story. This will help reinforce the idea that you will be acting out stories during this curriculum.
IV/ Conversation about the story
Sit back down in a group. Go over the story to make sure the children understand it. Remind the children that the four followers of the Buddha were trying to find out what was really true (what was the true way to meditate?).
Now ask some general questions: “What was the best part of the story? Who was your favorite character? Who was your least favorite character?” — or questions you come up with on your own.
Ask some questions specific to the story: “What did the dhak tree truly look like?” “Why didn’t the charioteer take all four sons at once to see the dhak tree? and Why did the charioteer take the four sons at different times of the year to see the dhak tree?” (Maybe he was trying to make a point, or maybe he wasn’t really paying attention?) Or ask any questions you wish to help the children think about the story.
Some of the children may know the story of the blind men and the elephant. See the Note to Leaders below for more on this story.
V/ Drawing the dhak tree
If you have time, the children could try drawing the dhak tree as each of the four sons saw it.
VI/ Free play
It’s important to give the children time to have fun together, and to help them build community. During the initial field test of this curriculum we always spent 5-10 minutes of each class session with all the children playing together. We discovered that group play helps to build community. In particular, we felt it helped the children grow more comfortable with each other, so that they were more willing to act out the story together. When we finished the field test and I began to write the final curriculum, I included play time as a core component of each session.
The group of children who were part of the field test loved playing “Duck Duck Goose,” and we played nearly every week. Instructions for playing “Duck Duck Goose” elsewhere on this website. Over the years, other groups have preferred different playtime activities, including: play with Legos; playing active games outdoors; walking a labyrinth (if you have one); etc. Try different games and activities, and see which works best to build friendships and community in your group.
More games elsewhere on this website.
VII/ Closing circle
Before leaving, have the children stand in a circle.
When the children are in a circle, ask them what they did today, and prompt them with questions and answers, e.g.: “What did we do today? We heard a story, right? Anyone remember what the story was about? It was about the family of Chang Kung and kindness.” You’re not trying to put any one child on the spot, but rather drawing on the wisdom of the group as a whole. If any parents have come to pick up their children, invite them to join the circle (so they can know what it is their children learned about this week).
End by saying together some closing words. It’s a good idea to say the same closing words each week, which can be posted in the classroom. Over time, the children may learn these words by heart. Below are the closing words we used in field tests — or you can use other closing words that you prefer:
Go out into the world in peace,
Be of good courage,
Hold fast to what is good,
Return to no one evil for evil.
Strengthen the fainthearted
Help the suffering;
Be patient with all,
Love all living beings.
Then tell the children how you enjoyed seeing them (if that’s true), and that you look forward to seeing them again next week.
Note to leaders
The story of the dhak tree is obviously similar to the story of the blind men and the elephant. Versions of the blind-men-and-elephant story are told in several religious traditions, including Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism. Each time this story is told, it is told slightly differently, usually to make a theological point. For your reference, I’ve given several versions of this story below.
If the children mention the story of the blind men and the elephant, you may want to retell the story for the whole class. The first version below would be a good one to read to the children.
(More versions may be found at Prof. D. L. Ashliman’s website on folklore; he devotes one whole webpage to the story. Ashliman classifies this story as a folktale of Aarne-Thompson-Uther Type 1317.)
First version: A modern Western interpretation
A version by Lev Tolstoy, in his Fables for Children, translated from the Russian and edited by Leo Wiener (London: J. M. Dent and Company, 1904), p. 28.
The King and the Elephants
An Indian king ordered all the blind people to be assembled, and when they came, he ordered that all the elephants be shown to them. The blind men went to the stable and began to feel the Elephants. One felt a leg, another a tail, a third the stump of a tail, a fourth a belly, a fifth a back, a sixth the ears, a seventh the tusks, and an eighth a trunk.
Then the king called the blind men, and asked them: “What are my Elephants like?”
One blind man said: “Your elephants are like posts.” He had felt the legs.
Another blind man said: “They are like bath brooms.” He had felt the end of the tail.
A third said: “They are like branches.” He had felt the tail stump.
The one who had touched a belly said: “The elephants are like a clod of earth.”
The one who had touched the sides said: “They are like a wall.”
The one who had touched a back said: “They are like a mound.”
The one who had touched the ears said: “They are like a mortar.”
The one who had touched the tusks said: “They are like horns.”
The one who had touched the trunk said that they were like a stout rope.
And all the Blind Men began to dispute and to quarrel.
Second version: A Hindu interpretation
Version as told in Sri Ramakrishna’s Teachings, part 1, first edition (Lohaghat P. O., Dt. Almora, Himalayas: 1916), no. 398, p. 127.
Four blind men went to see an elephant.
One who touched its leg said, “The elephant is like a pillar.”
The second who touched the trunk said, “The elephant is like a thick club.”
The third touched the belly, and thought it to be like a big jar.
The fourth who felt the ears, concluded that the elephant was like a winnowing fan.
They then began to dispute amongst themselves as to the figure of the animal they had touched.
A passer-by hearing them quarrel, said, “What is it this you are disputing about?”
Then they stated the question and asked him to arbitrate. He said, “Not one of you knows the real elephant. As a whole, it is neither like a pillar, nor a jar, nor a winnowing fan, nor a club. But its legs are like pillars, its belly like a big jar, its ears like a winnowing fan, and its trunk like a thick club. The elephant itself is a combination of all these.”
In exactly the same manner do men [sic] quarrel among themselves about religion, each having seen some different aspect of the Deity.
Third version: A Muslim interpretation
Version as told by Sanai in The first book of the Hadiqatu’l-Haqiqat; or, The Enclosed Garden of the Truth of the Hakim Abu’l-Majd Majdud Sana’i of Ghazna, edited and translated by J. Stephenson (Calcutta: Baptist Mission Press, 1910), p. 13.
There was a great city in the country of Ghur, in which all the people were blind. A certain king passed by that place, bringing his army and pitching his camp on the plain. He had a large and magnificent elephant to minister to his pomp and excite awe, and to attack in battle.
A desire arose among the people to see this monstrous elephant, and a number of the blind, like fools, visited it, every one running in his haste to find out its shape and form.
They came, and being without the sight of their eyes groped about it with their hands; each of them by touching one member obtained a notion of some one part; each one got a conception of an impossible object, and fully believed his fancy true. When they returned to the people of the city, the others gathered round them, all expectant, so misguided and deluded were they. They asked about the appearance and shape of the elephant, and what they told all listened to.
One asked him whose hand had come upon its ear about the elephant; he said, “It is a huge and formidable object, broad and rough and spreading, like a carpet.”
And he whose hand had come upon its trunk said, “I have found out about it; it is straight and hollow in the middle like a pipe, a terrible thing and an instrument of destruction.”
And he who had felt the thick hard legs of the elephant said, “As I have it in mind, its form is straight like a planed pillar.”
Every one had seen some one of its parts, and all had seen it wrongly. No mind knew the whole. Knowledge is never the companion of the blind. All, like fools deceived, fancied absurdities.
Men know not the Divine essence; into this subject the philosophers may not enter.
Fourth version: A Buddhist interpretation
Version as told in the The Udāna; or, The Solemn Utterrances of the Buddha, translated from the Pali by D. M. Strong (London: Luzac and Company, 1902), pp. 93-96.
Thus have I heard:
On a certain occasion, the Blessed One dwelt at Savatthi, in the Jetavana, the garden of Anathapindika.
Now at that time a large number of Samanas, Brahmanas and wandering monks of various heretical sects, holding a variety of views, doubters on many points, having many diverse aspirations, and recourse to that which relates to various heresies, entered Savatthi for alms.
Some of these Samanas and Brahmanas held that the world is eternal and contended that this view was true and every other false.
Some said: “The world is not eternal.”
Some said: “The world is finite.”
Some said: “The world is infinite.”
Some said: “The soul and the body are identical.”
Some said: “The soul and the body are not identical.”
Some said: “The Perfect One continues to exist after death.”
Some said: “The Perfect One does not continue to exist after death.”
Some said: “The Perfect One exists and does not exist after death.”
Some said: “The Perfect One neither exists nor does not exist after death.”
Each contending their view was true and every other false.
These quarrelsome, pugnacious, cavilling monks wounded one another with sharp words (lit. mouth-javelins) declaiming: “Such is the truth, such is not the truth: the truth is not such, such is the truth.”
And a number of Bhikkhus [monks], robing themselves in the forenoon and taking their alms-bowls and tunics, entered Savatthi for alms and when they had returned from their rounds and finished their meal, they went to where the Blessed One was and drawing near, they saluted the Blessed One and sat down apart, and while thus sitting they said to the Blessed One: “Just now, Sire, a large number of Samanas and Brahmanas and wandering monks holding various heresies entered Savatthi for alms, and they are disputing among themselves, saying: ‘This is the truth, such is not the truth etc. [as above. Transl.]'”
“These heretical monks, O Bhikkhus, are blind, eyeless, they know not what is right, they know not what is wrong, they know not what is true, they know not what is false. These monks not perceiving what is right, not perceiving what is wrong, not perceiving what is true, not perceiving what is false, become disputatious, saying: ‘such is the truth, such is not the truth etc. [as above. Transl.]'”
In former times, O Bhikkhus, there was a King in this town of Savatthi. And the King, O Bhikkhus, called a man to him and said: “Go, thou, and collect all the men born blind in Savatthi and bring them here.”
“Be it so, Lord” said that man in assent to the King and he went to Savatthi and he brought all the men born blind in Savatthi to where the King was and drawing near he said to the King: “Lord, all the men blind from their birth in Savatthi are present.”
“Pray, then, bring an elephant before them.”
“Be it so, Lord” said that man in assent to the King and he brought an elephant into the presence of the blind men and said: “This, O blind men, is an elephant.”
To some of the blind men he presented the head of the elephant, saying, “Such, O blind men, is an elephant.”
To some he presented the body, saying: “such is an elephant.”
To some he presented the feet, saying: “Such is an elephant.”
To some he presented the back, saying: “Such is an elephant.”
To some he presented the tail, saying : “Such is an elephant.”
To some he presented the hairy tuft of the tail, saying: ‘Such is an elephant.’
The show-man, O Bhikkhus, having presented the elephant to these blind ones, went to where the King was and drawing near said to the King: “The elephant, Lord, has been brought before the blind men, do now as seems fit.”
And the King went to where the blind men were, and drawing near said to them: “Do you now know what an elephant is like?”
“Assuredly, Lord; we now know what an elephant is like.”
“Tell me then, O blind men, what an elephant is like.”
And those blind men, O Bhikkhus, who had felt the head of the elephant, said: “An elephant, Sir, is like a large round jar.
Those who had felt its ears, said: “It is like a winnowing basket.”
Those who had felt its tusks, said: “It is like a plough-share.”
Those who had felt its trunk, said: “It is like a plough.”
Those who had felt its body, said: “It is like a granary.”
Those who had felt its feet, said: “It is like a pillar.”
Those who had felt its back, said: “It is like a mortar.”
Those who had felt its tail, said: “It is a like a pestle.”
Those who had felt the tuft of its tail, said: “It is like a broom.”
And they all fought amongst themselves with their fists, declaring, “Such is an elephant, such is not elephant, an elephant is not like that, it is like this.”
And the King, O Bhikkhus, was highly delighted.
In exactly the same way, O Bhikkhus, do these heretical people, blind and without insight, dispute among themselves saying “This doctrine is true, every other is false.”
And the Blessed One in this connection, on that occasion, breathed forth this solemn utterance:
Well is it known that some Samanas and Brahmanas,
Who attach themselves to methods of analysis,
And perceiving only one side of a case,
Disagree with one another.