M1:271 — هر دو گون زنبور خوردند از محل / لیک شد زان نیش و زین دیگر عسل

Translation: Both kinds of bees fed from the same place, But from one came a sting, and from the other, honey.

Meaning: This verse highlights that identical origins or external inputs do not guarantee identical outcomes. Two seemingly similar entities can, due to their intrinsic nature, produce vastly different results.

This beyt, part of a crucial sequence in the Masnavi, imparts a fundamental epistemological and ontological insight: the essential difference between appearance and reality. I have emphasized in my lectures that one of the most perilous fallacies of the human mind is to judge the deeds of the pure by our own standards, or to equate outward forms. Rumi himself declares: 'Do not measure the deeds of the pure by your own; though shīr (lion) and shīr (milk) look alike in writing.' Outward forms can be deceptive; similar words, or even similar appearances, do not necessarily denote identical meanings or inner natures.

As Rumi observes, 'The whole world went astray because of this; few became aware of the substitutes of God.' People throughout history have been misled because they mistook saints and prophets for themselves, saying: 'We are human, they are human; we and they are bound by sleep and food.' But this negligence and blindness prevented them from grasping the truth that 'there is an infinite difference between them.' It is here that Rumi, through his brilliant examples, illuminates this endless distinction. Our verse, 'Both kinds of bees fed from the same place, / But from one came a sting, and from the other, honey,' is the first and perhaps most tangible of these illustrations.

Consider: two bees drink from the same flower, feed from the same source. Yet one delivers a venomous sting, while the other yields healing honey. Rumi provides other examples: 'Both kinds of deer ate grass and drank water, / From one came dung, and from the other pure musk,' or 'Both kinds of reeds drank from the same water source, / This one empty, and that one full of sugar.' All these illustrate that the essential core of every object or individual is what transforms the source into the product. The food is the same, but one transforms it into impurity, and the other into the light of God. One produces avarice and envy, and the other, the love of the One.

This is the 'factory' within us. Our internal nature and temperament process inputs according to their own essence. A malicious person, the more they are nourished, the more their malice grows, just like the dung-eating crow that desires a longer life only to consume more filth. But a mystic or a believer transforms the same input into gnosis and love. The Quran also states this: 'And We send down of the Qur'an that which is healing and mercy for the believers, but it does not increase the wrongdoers except in loss.' A single nourishment, for two different temperaments, yields two completely divergent results. It's like a plate of chelow kabob, which gives strength to the healthy but brings death to a patient with cholera.

Thus, we must ask, 'Which tree are we watering?' We water the tree of our own existence, but which aspect of our being is being nourished? This distinction is only comprehensible through the 'possessor of taste' (sāḥib-i dhawq) and a 'healthy palate'; someone who can discern the sweet from the bitter, not by appearance, but by essence. The difference between magic and miracle, or between the prayer of a believer and that of a hypocrite, stems from this very principle: identical appearance, but utterly divergent intention. This is a foundational lesson of the Masnavi, saving us from superficiality and guiding us to the depths of reality.

Key takeaways

• Outward appearances can be identical, but inner realities are infinitely different; beware of superficial resemblances.
• The intrinsic nature (temperament and disposition) of every being determines how inputs are transformed into final outputs.
• Food, experience, or even the Quran can yield contradictory results (sting/honey, envy/love) depending on one's inner disposition and intention.
• Only a 'possessor of taste' (sāḥib-i dhawq) with a healthy inner palate can discern essential differences, unlike superficial judges.
• It is the inner character and intention that imbues an action with meaning, not merely its form (e.g., the prayer of a believer vs. a hypocrite).
• Understanding this principle is key to recognizing prophets and saints and avoiding the fallacy of equating oneself with them.