Being Mindful Stories

Story · Ajahn Chah

The empty flag

From a talk by Ajahn Chah, “The Two Faces of Reality”

1 min read

A traditional tale: A traditional tale from the Buddhist tradition that Ajahn Chah retold in his talk, not something that happened to him.

The story — retold in our own words from Ajahn Chah's talk

Retold in our own words from Ajahn Chah's talk “The Two Faces of Reality”, in The Teachings of Ajahn Chah (2007 web edition), p. 34. Read the original talk

Ajahn Chah retells a story he once read in a book about Zen. One day an assembly of monks gathered for a meeting. Outside the hall a flag was blowing in the wind. Two monks disputed how the flag was actually blowing: one claimed it was because of the wind, the other because of the flag. They quarreled because of their narrow views and could not agree, and would have argued until the day they died. Their teacher intervened and said that neither was right: the correct understanding is that there is no flag and there is no wind.

A reflection (in the spirit of Ajahn Chah's talk)

Many arguments are like this one, two people both sure they are right about something neither has looked at closely. Ajahn Chah retells the old story to loosen our grip on fixed views. When a dispute feels endless, it may help to step back and ask what is really being fought over.

Reflection written by Being Mindful Stories with AI help, in the spirit of the talk. These are not Ajahn Chah's own words.

In brief (our summary)

Two monks argue over whether the wind or the flag is moving, until their teacher says there is no flag and there is no wind.

Teaching point

Arguments come from narrow views; seen clearly, the things we fight over are only conventions.

When this story may help

Themes

Source & credit

Told by Ajahn Chah in the talk “The Two Faces of Reality”, in The Teachings of Ajahn Chah (2007 web edition), p. 34

The book is © The Sangha, Wat Nong Pah Pong, offered for free distribution. Read the talk free at ajahnchah.org.

The story text is Being Mindful Stories's retelling in our own words of how Ajahn Chah tells it in this talk, not his own words and not a quotation. Read the talk in the book for his exact words. The title, summary and reflection are Being Mindful Stories's editorial notes. Please credit the teacher and link the original talk in the book. Markdown version

  • Seven blind Australians and the kangaroo

    In brief: Brahm adapts the blind-men-and-elephant into seven blind Australians feeling a kangaroo — tail like a snake, legs like a boomerang, pouch…

    Read full story

    Once, there were seven blind Australians, and they've never, ever seen a kangaroo before, even living in this country. But they always, they've heard about a kangaroo, and they wonder what a kangaroo actually is. So they decided, you know, the seven blind Australians. So go and find a kangaroo and feeling find out what a kangaroo really is. So one of them managed to find a kangaroo and felt the tail and fair. Oh, the tail, that's like a snake and the one who felt the legs said, oh no, no, elephant is a boomerang is this way the bent?

    The one who felt the pouch said, oh, an elephant is a handbag, a lady's handbag. One who felt the Joey inside, said an elephant is a teddy bear. I'm making this up as I go along. By the way, the one who felt the if you ever seen the kangaroo's pores, it's a back scratcher. You know, if you're using a bathroom, it's scratch. The one who fell. How where am I going now? One of felt the ears, what's the ears like, the ears like a radar because they go back and those are the ears.

    Actually move different directions, and the one who felt their head wasn't going to be the head. It's like it's like a deer, isn't it? So they all argued one elephant was an elephant because elephant is a boomerang. No, it's not, it's a snake that's a back scratcher. It's a Hermes bag handbag for women. Now it's got two heads, one of the top one at the bottom. Oh, the middle. Rather, and they all argued about what an kangaroo was now the point of that. Similarly, you know, it's usually just a simile of the no blind man and the elephant.

    The purpose of that simile is to point out that each one of these were people were right. You know, the one who felt the tail actually felt the tail. They weren't imagining this, it wasn't some sort of illusion on drugs or something, it actually felt it. It was real. And to them it did appear like a snake and the one who felt sort of the pout. It does feel like a lady's handbag if you've never actually seen it before, and it's nice and soft, it's beautiful. Every one of those thought they were right because they had person experience and now you can understand why.

    We argue with one another because we always really believe that we are right and we've got reasons for that our experience, our knowledge, our research on the Internet. I've researched it's right, you research something else. Other people on the Internet is find something totally different now. This is a problem because we always think we're right, just like we think just because it goes quack quack, it has to be a duck. We found that later on, we are wrong. How many times have you been wrong in life? How many times? You really, really, really, really, really, really thought you were right and you turned out to be wrong. Each one of us has I have many times.

    Open story page·Watch this telling

  • “I never argued with anyone”

    In brief: A fit 90-year-old says the secret of his long life is that he never argued with anyone. “That can't be right,” says the interviewer. “Ah……

    Read full story

    This man, he was, ah, 90 years of age on his birthday, still very fit and healthy. And they was interviewed in the in the newspapers. 90 years of age and you're still fit and healthy. What's the secret of your fitness and health and long life? He said. Cuz I never argued with anyone all my life, and the interviewer said, that can't be right. And he said, ah, I ask, I agree with you.

    Open story page·Watch this telling

  • In Laos, war stops for lunch

    In brief: A monk friend, in Luang Prabang during the war between the communists and royalists, is eating lunch at a bamboo-and-thatch restaurant…

    Read full story

    I remember one of the stories this. I never saw this myself, but this was told to me by one of my friends who was a monk. He was in Luang Prabang, the second the city of Laos, doing the War with the Communists and the Royalists. And this is actually how you relax. He was at one of these little restaurants, you know, they would fare every occupational health and safety regulation in Australia.

    But the food was delicious, you know, dirty but great food, bamboo and thatch. That's all there was, and he'd go there for his lunch. He was sitting at a table eating some delicious meal, and he did notice there was a government soldiers. They were sitting at another table having their lunch with the M16, the old machine gun rifles leaning against the wall. This was lunchtime and he was enjoying his lunch when his heart almost stopped when he saw the Communist soldiers came in. They called Pathet at the time, these were the enemy. This was a watch in the Vietnam War times, and the Communists came into the restaurant and he went to dive under the table.

    But no one else was trying to escape or dive under the table because they saw the enemy troops, the Communist troops. They just looked around and chose another table, they put their guns against the wall and they ordered their lunch because in Laos at that time, war always stops for lunch. Oh, would it be a wonderful thing? If even these days people get their priorities right and lost? They'd always have a lunch break when you're free fighting a war. And that's what they did those days. And of course afterwards said what happened next after lunch was over.

    All of them, they had some understanding the, you know, the Communist troops would go one way. The royalists will go the other way, so they would have to meet each other.

    Open story page·Watch this telling

  • Itch on your head, scratching your bottom

    In brief: Ajahn Chah's one-liner on blame, applied to the newly built monastery wall a backhoe pushed over: blaming someone is like having an itch…

    Read full story

    He said if you blame somebody who's responsible for pushing that wall over Bodhinyana monastery, who's responsible for making that big mistake? Who is responsible for not doing it in time, who's responsible for not sending emails correctly, who's responsible? He said. That is like having an itch on your head and you scratch your bum. Think about it. If you've got an itch down here and you scratch your head, does the itch go away? Of course not, but you get two itches for the price of one.

    Open story page·Watch this telling

All stories·Find a story for your situation