Center Vs Periphery
( Parable of the Sower)
I am watching a farmer clearing the ground for paddy plantation. His field has a variety of soil. Some areas are level while other areas are stony and bushy. The farmer starts with the easier patches. As he digs he takes the stones that come up and throws them on to the sides where there are some bushes and stones. He burdens the periphery areas with more stones and bushes. He seems to have no plans for this patch of ground, at least for this year.
Finally, after much sweat and hard work, he
has converted some of the easier patches into cultivable good soil. It is made
good in a way at the expense of the periphery patches which are made worse by
the additional stones and bushes that are thrown on to them. The farmer takes
great care of the good soil. He digs deep, puts fertilizer, provides water,
puts up hedges, invests the best of seeds. He invests ‘all’ he has for the good soil while he seems
to have no thought at all for the periphery. The farmer seems ‘unjust’ to the
periphery and partial to the good soil.
He may seem unjust but he is smart and calculative. He wants a good crop from
the good soil so that he can invest more and bring more thorny soil into the
category of the good in the coming year.
The elder son
stands by the roadside with folded hands accusing his younger brother of
wastefulness and immorality. He accuses him because he is not obedient, chaste,
hardworking like him. The father gently reminds him that he has given the elder
son ‘all’ he has. He has received far more than the younger son. The Pharisee in
the sanctuary near the altar is well aware of his virtues. He thanks God that ‘
he is not like that man’ near the door of the temple.
So often we
find in our communities the elder sons, we may call them the ‘good brigades’, complaining because others are not like them. They easily make comparison
and they find themselves good, faithful, obedient, and taking up
responsibilities, while they find others having an easy life, not keeping the
rules, not obedient, chaste, and poor. The ‘good brigades‘ have no right to complain
or to compare with those on the periphery. The ‘good’ had the opportunity, and privilege
others did not have. They had opportunities to study, some were privileged to
be sent abroad, others carefully trained with much investment under the
watchful care of the authorities. All
this, while those who were considered not so productive and good, those on the
periphery, had to bear the brunt of the sticks and stones that were heaped on
them. The farmer although seemed unjust was hopeful of a great harvest from the
good soil so that he could invest more and bring more and more periphery into
the category of the good.
The farmer will
be disappointed if the ‘good brigades’, the elder sons, begin to complain and condemn because those
around them are not like them. They cannot
be expected to be like them. Farmer had not invested on them, even one fourth of what he has invested for
the good. Instead he had burdened them with additional sticks and stones.
The only way to
bring all the categories of soil into ‘good soil’ is for the good to produce more so that the farmer can invest more in the
coming years. Rather than compare and condemn, the ‘good brigades’ and the elder
sons, need to look at the opportunity, the privilege, the investment the farmer
has made for them and produce at least a thirty or sixty if not a hundred percent.
