When I first started in the school x years ago I understood the practises as they were explained to me and as I connected with them as follows:
In the midst of our everyday lives, practise being present, listening, being honest, unselfish etc: and this practise will transform the immediate situation, for ourselves and for others we are in contact with. It was experienced and known to be true. There was no requirement to change your job or get involved in politics, social reform etc. But as time has passed there seems to be a continuing 'pressure' towards 'involvement' in these areas. I am not a lawyer, or a politician, or an economist. I have written to my MP three times. The response to the last of these made it clear to me that I didn’t sufficiently understand the issues involved and was beginning to dabble, through a misplaced sense of duty in areas I should keep out of. Does not the Gita say:
“Better by far to do your own duty, however bereft of merit, than another's duty well performed; better is death in the discharge of one's duty, another's duty is fraught with danger." [Ch3, V35]
It is known, that as far as various forms of activism are concerned, I should act when I feel genuinely moved to do so and I am sufficiently informed. Not act because I feel the weight of a continual overt or covert accusation that I am “doing nothing”. ... click "Read more"
When I understand that my responsibility is to practise within the midst of my everyday life, not try to change anything but just be present and honest; things are considerably simpler. As Jesus said in the Gospel of Thomas:
"When two make peace with each other in the same house, they will say to the mountain, 'Move !' and it will move."
I have seen situations transform through this: with 'decades old' feuds within my family; with getting to a point of mutual cooperation with a previously difficult individual at work; with getting beyond frustration with a member of my group to experiencing some genuine affection. This is the work, as far as I’m concerned and it may just 'move mountains' in a way that misinformed activism wont. The constant covert accusation of "doing nothing" coming from some directions is false and unjust. It’s result is perpetual stress between the ‘as is’ and ‘the ideal’ and magnification of the 'doer'.
I am not cynical or indifferent to the more practically inclined amongst us. I wish you every success in your endeavours. I support this in various ways, when I am moved to do so. Quite often, believe it or not, without any impulse from the school. But this comes back to ‘dignity of difference’. With reference to the group member alluded to above I can see that someone else has a different inclination to myself. They are devoted to practical action, I feel I am naturally more contemplative. If we can begin to see this and allow the other the space to be themselves, to be of service according to their temperament without saying "you are wrong, I am right”, then I think we can move together in our various ways. We are of optimum service when allowing our natural tendencies towards good to flow unhindered. Conversely, interference is ‘fraught with danger’. It causes people to forget who they are.
'The roads are different, the goal is one ... When people come there, all quarrels or differences or disputes that happen along the road are resolved. Those who shouted at each other along the road "You are wrong" or "You are an unbeliever" forget their differences when they come there because there, all hearts are in unison.' ~ Rumi
Monday, February 12, 2007
Response Ability
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Kapila
I couldn't agree more. Everyone has the right (and indeed, the duty) to find their own path.
I've been working through my own 'activist' tendencies gradually. It's like an itch I need to scratch, and it gradually grows less strong. It has been important also to get over a lot of fears I had about the practical world. Now when I choose not to act, I know that I'm not making that choice because of fear.
PS I have inserted a "read more" break, in accordance with what I mentioned last week.
And yet...and yet... you, too, Kapila, are a citizen and are following the way of the householder. You, too, partake of the benefits of living in this society, and no doubt pay your taxes accordingly. You, too, have a voice.
I once heard the then MP for Beckenham saying he had received ten letters about a coal miners' strike. 'And we don't have a mine in the constituency!' he said. Under those circumstances he sat up and took a great deal of notice about coal mining. Your voice is not puny.
We all have different talents and interests, and running around knocking on doors and fighting political campaigns is not for everyone - and just as well.
But we do have a responsibility to engage with the society of which we are a part - as a minimum to vote and be a good neighbour, and then, if we have a special interest (this might be no more than experience of a particular parking problem, or it might be more)we should make that knowledge available.
There isn't anybody out there who knows it all. We're all part of the body politic, the 'civitas', and should play our part accordingly.
I don't dispute anything you say Laura. I vote, I make choices as a consumer according to best information, I donate to various causes. It hasn't escaped my attention that I'm part of society. The issues I have are:
- some still seem to continually accuse others of "doing nothing", which isn't actually even possible when you look at it. We are inextricably linked to the web of life and everything we do/think/feel/say has an effect.
- I believe we should both think and feel the necessity to act. Not be pressured by someone else to do so and thereby become instruments of their will.
- some think without acting, others act without thinking. Action that is dubiously intentioned and/or based on partial understanding creates more problems than it solves. What people need is the clarity of being still, then seeing what is necessary. Then acting. To be 'pressured' is to lose the stillness and act from somewhere else. That's no use to me or you or the world.
What's the problem? All that you say is self-evident, surely, and I would heartily agree - of course you shouldn't be pressured into acting against your conscience, or against your will. But people will try sometimes.
But then you wouldn't be so pressured would you?
Keeping an open heart is another matter. And acting in an informed manner.
Yes, it is self-evident. But I need to remind myself of this because of influences to the contrary.
This issue is a lot bigger than the School, and I think that Kapila is right to raise it.
Our culture has within it huge assumptions about the need for universal concern for others (regardless of their connection to us, or lack of it) and corresponding duties to alleviate suffering wherever it may be found.
This goes back to popular anti-slavery campaigns and the like in the 18th Century. It comes to be a real rival to contemplative spirituality. "In spirit and in practice, [the atheist philosopher] Voltaire was nearer the kingdom of heaven than the slaveholding clergy of America" (abolitionist minister Henry Clarke Wright).
How to balance these competing demands? I don't have an answer to it. Maybe we need to combine private spirituality with organised public activism. If we don't choose to participate in the latter, then we give those who do the means to do so.
It may always have been competing demands - the Mary and Martha story shows this. The Gita does too.
Kevin said:
"How to balance these competing demands? I don't have an answer to it."
Well I wouldn't be audacious enough to say I have an answer but the remembrance of the practise of simply trying to be more present etc within the midst of my normal activities is 'the balance' as far as I can see. I have heard that the Shankaracharya says somewhere (I paraphrase), "don't go looking for missions". There would appear to be a difference in the inner quality of:
- responding within everyday events
as opposed to
- looking for missions?
This isn't intended to be an abstract philosophical debate. I relate it back to our school environment because I feel that those inclined to action are often those who speak first and with most force. The man of knowledge wants to keep penetrating the question. The man of devotion is usually the most easy going, seeing all as the Lord, so why change anything? I believe there is a danger of these temperaments falling victim to the 'pressure' to 'act', real or imagined. (Help me out here, am I delusory?) I reiterate: I'm not saying 'don't act', just that the 'pressure' is not helpful.
I remember talking to a lady on a residential once. She described how, at work, when a situation called for her to speak she would momentarily 'pause' and look within before speaking. But she found that most often, someone else would 'leap in the gap'. I often share this frustration. We can practise patience & tolerance with this, but there is a lingering sense of something that should have been said that wasn't. The impetuous 'doer' has leapt in and hijacked the situation.
Perhaps this is one reason why communication on a blog is easier as it gives time to gather the thoughts, to listen within to what needs to be said. I don't claim to always get this right. There are things I would say differently in retrospect, but the principle of 'listening within' before speaking or acting must be correct?
I'm often guilty of leaping in but find that I may regret doing so and wish I had given a bit more space to the question before sticking in my penny's worth.
So you are not alone in having doubts about the wisdom or otherwise of your speech.
It comes down to a matter of substance as to whether or not you are heard. If you are a slow burner, then save it to the end when everyone else has had their say. You will be listened to all the more carefully.
Someone else may have apparently 'hijacked' the situation. The chances are, however, that they're just blowing the froth around. If you keep on listening and reflecting, I promise you that the clarity and wisdom you bring to the party at the end is worth more than any
amount of noise.
We all have different natures. I need constantly to remind myself to stay still and listen, you may need to gee up a bit.
Laura said:
"We all have different natures. I need constantly to remind myself to stay still and listen, you may need to gee up a bit."
I’m not sure that geeing up is what is necessary. It doesn’t seem to be possible to make the right words come more quickly. In the same way as we cannot force inspiration? Kevin, elsewhere quoted Emerson’s ‘Self-Reliance’ (which I have been reading and thoroughly recommend). There is an excerpt that goes as follows:
“What I must do is all that concerns me, not what the people think. This rule, equally arduous in actual and in intellectual life, may serve for the whole distinction between greatness and meanness. It is the harder, because you will always find those who think they know what is your duty better than you know it. It is easy in the world to live after the world's opinion; it is easy in solitude to live after our own; but the great man is he who in the midst of the crowd keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude.”
If I may relate an experience. I was once on holiday and visited a chapel near where I was staying a couple of times. I arrived there fairly early before the crowds came. Whoever prepared the chapel for the day left the Bible open at a particular reading for the day. Both days, there was an experience of deep outer and inner stillness. As I read the selected words, they went deep into the heart. There was absolutely no doubt. And although the words are clearly of universal import, the experience was as of having the most intimate conversation I have ever had. When I left this quiet place and continued travelling, I found myself experiencing the increasingly coarse vibrations of the modern, busy world and it was increasingly difficult to stay connected to what was known.
If I relate this back to speaking & acting, it is as Emerson is saying, that it is necessary to retain the independence - the state of ‘no doubt’ experienced in solitude - when in the midst of the world and the million and one opinions diverting us from what we know or knew. Sometimes the group approach to penetrating a text can be helpful, at other times it obscures what was previously self-evident with lots of argument and opinion. What is necessary to achieve Emerson's independence in the midst of this?
- Greater strength? Which will no doubt come about through greater discipline?
- Refusal to accept another’s opinion merely out of a respect born of social niceties?
- Trust in ourselves?
- Any other offers?
Kapila said: 'Any other offers?'
Can I (gently) offer this: "Listen to your own heart. It's wiser than your head."
It's also helpful to find other people who don't want to make you think according to rule.
Kapila - as I was reading your latest comment I was somehow reminded that hesitancy is as much a defect as over-eagerness. Rather late in the day I'm coming to realise that timing is much more important than I previously gave it credit.
Diogenes is right - listen to your own heart. It's good advice - let's all do that.
I loved the instance of the bible in the chapel. Thank you.
Post a Comment