I very much enjoyed the responses to the "Golden Rules" post a few days ago. I think that what happened was that we stopped thinking about the problems as being about "them" and started to look at ourselves, with humour and humility. Maybe we could do more of that. The blog is useful to chivvy along the pace of change, I hope, but the real change is within me and you.
Another thing I would like to raise is the way we use quotations.
I often think of a wise quotation that I might use to contradict what someone else says, but I very rarely use it. It always feels like using a hammer to crack a nut ... and maybe the nut one is talking to is a human being, after all! ... click "Read more"
This blog is 99% made up of the words of its contributors. Why is this important? Because I believe that we in the School rely too much on the words of the wise, and need to learn to stand on our own two feet. The wise are constantly contradicting each other, anyway. The Bible is self-contradictory, if one is literal about it. Shantananda contradicts himself. So if we are going to rely on the wise, we need to place more emphasis on our own understanding. If we regurgitate partly-digested wisdom at each other, this is not communication.
There are blogs which are the exact opposite - a collection of wise quotations, with maybe 1% original content. I would not disparage that at all, but this blog has a different function.
Shantananda told the translator at the first meeting: "don't listen to my words; listen to my meaning, and translate that". On another occasion he said, "no-one needs to bind himself to a word". He also said that the quickest way to self-realization is to speak from the heart, and act on your words, without worrying too much about whether you've made a mistake or properly understood the teaching.
These principles of his have been honoured almost entirely in the breach.
There have been too many wise words from India and elsewhere, and too little understanding. We need to start to discover our own voices. Some (I know) will say that this is the route to egotism, but I can only respond that if that is what is in my heart, then "better out than in"! We cannot purify what is hidden, but only what is shown.
So I would propose this rule:
Never use a quotation to dismiss someone else's words, or when you have words of your own, however poor.
Responses?
Monday, May 14, 2007
Quote ... Unquote
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
The intention, if I use a quote is either:
- it encapsulates something better than I have words to express
- it gives a different take on something we have perhaps come to look at in a habitual way
With the latter, it's just a catalyst for discussion, not "you're wrong because such and such says so".
I agree with the spirit of the proposal, which I understand as not using a quote to defeat someone.
A quote can also give distance - sometimes laterally - to an idea which has got stuck. It gives authority - well, we know about that, for better or worse. But if it's used just to push out the boat, that boat soon loses wind.
In conversation, I'd much rather hear from the person him/herself. If quotes are then used (except very sparingly) it seems like hiding and that's no good.
In an earlier conversation, the notion of holding the tension between the authority and the experience was raised. Seems there are potential errors at either polarity:
- assert the authority & stymie any exploration, enquiry or experience that (apparently) contradicts the authority
- assert our experience & deny anything beyond it
I don’t want to polarise on this.
But to go to the experience - the way certain snippets of wisdom can arrive in the in-tray can be synchronous, living, intelligent is a way the individual cannot control. When ‘in the flow’ the arrival of certain confirming ‘information’ is known as grace. There is agreement between the inner and the outer knowledge.
I received an excerpt from a mailing list recently that answered a conundrum in a very direct, practical way. I had been struggling at work with how to engage with various levels of complexity; technical, political etc ,etc. The excerpt was to do with ‘demonstrating simplicity’ in the midst of all this. This was known to be peace for myself and service for others in this situation. The burden was lessened. The ‘answer’ was perfect. Nothing less.
I figure the Absolute can speak to us through any number of instruments & we need to be awake to this. It’s unfortunate if quotes have been ‘used’ to shut people up in the past & prevent discussion but I don’t see that it’s necessary to let this colour right now. Right now is different.
But when I post, I will reflect upon whether a quote is being used as an ‘avoidance strategy’. The flavour of this is also known. That’s my responsibility. Others must take responsibility for their interpretation. The intent right now is not avoidance or obscuration, but I can’t know how someone else really hears these words?
Apologies. I feel the tone of the last comment contained misdirected frustration.
This is a difficult issue, Kapila.
I must say that I have never felt that you are quoting things at people aggressively. I understand that you're using the quotation to think about the subject at hand.
Post a Comment