It reminds me of another story. A milkman was adding water to the milk to later sell this diluted milk in the market. While he was busy a monkey took the bundle of cloth in which he kept his coins and climbed up on the tree. When the milkman saw this he shouted at it to give his money back.
The monkey started to throw one coin in the river and one on the land. That way half his money was lost in the river.
He got what he deserved.

Do you think the above story is true even in this case of benevolent monkey? The man who lost money has he being punished for his wrong deeds, the way milk man was punished for adulterating milk.

Do you think the above story is true even in this case of benevolent monkey? The man who lost money has he being punished for his wrong deeds, the way milk man was punished for adulterating milk.

True or not, what we have to see is the good deed of the monkey in making the Milkman realize his misdeed of adulterating the milk out of greed. Of course, it's a different kind of benevolence.

Do you think the above story is true even in this case of benevolent monkey? The man who lost money has he being punished for his wrong deeds, the way milk man was punished for adulterating milk.

True or not, what we have to see is the good deed of the monkey in making the Milkman realize his misdeed of adulterating the milk out of greed. Of course, it's a different kind of benevolence.

The monkey could not punish the milkman as he is unaware of the human's crime. But yet the milkman was punished but for what? Not for dishonesty but for negligence in safety of money.

Then, instead of writing moral for the milk man's story as 'tit for tat', should we start writing 'negligence will cause penalty'?

Then, instead of writing moral for the milk man's story as 'tit for tat', should we start writing 'negligence will cause penalty'?

Well it's up to the thread starter to decide.

Then, instead of writing moral for the milk man's story as 'tit for tat', should we start writing 'negligence will cause penalty'?

Well it's up to the thread starter to decide.

Anyone may draw any moral from the incident. Any moral will improve personality. However the monkey is unaware of our behavior rules. Hence monkey would not have attempted to teac anything. Even if the milkman were honest, monkey would not spare him. Thus the real cause of the milkman's misfortune is that he faile to take care of money. Thus the moral of this incident is that we should not be negligent of our belongings. Even if you are a decent and honest man, the pickpocket will rob you of your money if you are negligent.