The Greengrocer And The Parrot

Starting the story by using an allegory such as parrot has given life to it and transfers this life to the reader as I myself feel that I'm living in the middle of the story and watching the greengrocer and the parrot nearly. Indeed, the first part of the story has pulled me inside it. At the beginning I understood that Molana has mentioned some qualities of human indirectly:

1.Being mad at something that has frustrated him(human) such as parrot's carelessness in breaking the bottle.
2.Being sorry about his hasty madness and reaction.
3.Trying to compensate his mistakes by for example distributing gifts.

I sometimes have these features, too. So this part has reminded me what negative features that I should correct are inside of me. Thank you Molana for this!
Then Molana puts the parrot the allegory of simple-minded people who compare the holy people's actions to theirs because they think both groups are human so all the actions and reasons are similar to each other. But Molana makes it clear by telling the differences exist ( are real) in the nature.

كافران اندر مري بوزينه طبع ، آفتي آمد درون سينه طبع

هرچه مردم مي كنند بوزينه هم ، آن كند كز مرد بيند دم به دم

This part may seem ridiculous but believe that it's true. We ourselves use this expression:
Imitation is the monkey's action and monkey is a kind of animal!
So the infidels are like animals (monkey, ape, parrot) because they think their actions are as correct and good as holy people! As parrot thought the bald-headed man was like itself.

Chess = Life White # Black Good # Bad => White = Good Black = Bad
Do you believe the above chart? Most of us think that this relation is correct, but I say it's not. Why? Because black itself isn't bad ( I mean it's essence isn't bad) it can become good and win or become bad and lose, so here we can say Victory # Defeat. Can you say black-skinned people are bad and white-skinned people are good? Of course no. Because both groups are from one spirit.

نام او محبوب از ذات وي است ، نام اين مبغوض از آفات وي است

I perceived this part like this:
The good name of mumin refers to his fair essence (I call it فطرت خداجو) means his existence is from God so all the bad things are rejected from him. But the bad name of infidel refers to his bad actions that has darkened his fair essence. Both groups go back to their origin (God) and will be called to account because God has given human the power of thought and option to choose his way (to become like animal or to become ...)

This story was a flick for me where I am really. Of course I don't want to be like parrot and I don't say I'm empty of its bad features, but I like to try the experience of becoming (...) and come out of the framework of (is) by rejecting the piece of rubbish which has made me forget my place!