I'd like to propose some positive principles for the blog. I would ask that everyone who participates is prepared to say, when necessary, these three sentences:
"I'm sorry, I got that wrong"
"You made a really good point there"
"What do you think?"
I've mentioned these before - my father learned them on a management course in a slightly different form - and at that point I applied them to the School. I said that the School needed to learn to say these sentences: to admit error and the possibility of error, to praise individual students, and to ask non-rhetorical questions with real curiosity. I still believe that that is correct.
But maybe a function of the blog is for us, as members of the School (or perhaps in some cases "Honoured Alumni"!), to learn how to be the change we want to see. We need to learn these conversational skills and use them. In addition to this, if we have disputes in future, we can refer to these sentences for a way out.
They're just short-hand, of course, and need to be interpreted intelligently. If I genuinely believe that what I am saying is right, then I should not say "I'm sorry, I got that wrong". But I might say, "I'm sorry that we're having this argument. Perhaps I've misunderstood your position. Can you explain it in different words?" Or I might say, "I've often found your remarks helpful in the past, but this appears to me to be wrong, because ..."
There may be those who cannot agree to these sentences. If so, now is the time to argue the case!
Monday, May 07, 2007
Three Golden Rules
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
I think I'm 10 out of 10 on this score - but maybe I've just got it wrong?
I think you're absolutely right... :)
And can I cheekily take this opportunity to teand may be interested that Gangaji's visit to London is now imminent?
Assuming that's a yes (sorry if I got that wrong...), the time and place are as follows:
PUBLIC MEETING WITH GANGAJI
Wednesday 16th and Thursday 17th May at 7.0 pm (but please be in your seat by 6.45), at King's College (Waterloo Campus), 150 Stamford Street,London SE1 (just by the Imax Cinema).
Everyone is welcome. Suggested donation on the door £12 - now need to book, just turn up.
I think it would be excellent if you came. What do you think...?
Sorry - I got that wrong... The first line should have read:
"And can I cheekily take this opportunity to tell everyone who reads this blog and may be interested..."
No prizes for this comp : provide 'School' answers to Kevin's three points...
I offer :
1 'Oh, that's historical -- it was appropriate at the time...'
2 'I'm glad you've realised that at last, Mr. ****...'
3 'Shall we read that passage again ?...'
Laura
I think we could all follow your example on it.
Hi Katharine
Already in the diary for the 17th. I'm looking forward to it.
Anonymous
I think you would have to take the prize for that one ... nailed it!
The question Kevin’s post throws up for me (support it in general terms as I think I do) is ‘Why do I find myself rather reluctant to apply these rules to myself, although I would be happy for others to use them?’
Here are some random thoughts, set down in a hurry before dashing off to work, and taking the statements one at a time. They are relatively honest, which means that I am not setting them down because I am proud of them, but perhaps in order to see if I am the only one with such unreasonable reservations.
"I'm sorry, I got that wrong”
This means that I would have to admit that I was fallible, which would throw into question all that I have previously said. I would have to admit that I was not inspired with knowledge straight from the Absolute. This might even in some instances throw into question the authority of the tutorial chair. After all, there is a long tradition in the School to the affect that ‘Mr M. said this; Mr M. said that… And there’s an end on’t.’ And all later leaders and tutors had only him to copy. (Mr. M. was not a man who ever used the words, ‘I’m sorry, I was wrong’. I leave any question of the authority of HH aside, since it is a given on this site that there is such authority in his statements.)
Of course, if I am indeed wrong, I would be open to having my whole metaphysical structure, built up with such effort over so long, reconsidered; a frightening thought for someone, obviously male, who lives in the mind.
"You made a really good point there"
I seem to have great difficulty in praising others. This, of course, is a personal thing, and I am not proud of it, but there is no doubt that it has found encouragement in the School. Thus, if its good, that’s the Absolute. Do not encourage the ego by praising it, for the ego might rise and take the credit. On the other hand, if it comes from the ego it must be bad. In neither case is there a place for praise.
"What do you think?"
Here I would have to remain open to adjustment of my ideas according to the response to this question. My system would therefore remain incomplete and open to revision according to what the reply might be. But I have it all worked out, don’t I, so I am not very willing to hear what lesser mortals might come up with, especially if it throws my own ideas into question.
All this, of course is pretty low-level thinking, a lot of it subconscious in its operation, albeit based on an (undoubtably poor) understanding of the teaching; but nonetheless it is there in the system and operative, which probably makes this exercise a valuable one.
Is anyone else as evil as this?
"relatively honest" ... I have to say, Son of Moses, that this is one of the most honest statements I've read here!
It's interesting to me that I was led to set these down by a sense of shame at how low the level of my conversation had become (see comments on "Zing"). One of the challenging things about this blog has been that it has been a place for us to use our own voices, and not just to quote the wise. Maybe I thought my own voice was fairly pure and honest, but the implicit pride and arrogance seems to have come through.
It wouldn't be right for me to blame the School for that (although it might make me feel better to do so). I think that in any organization there will be dark corners for the ahankara to lurk, and perhaps we are throwing some light into them.
The one that stood out for me in reading your comment is the second. The first and third I can accept and practice easily enough, but praise is difficult for me personally. The next question is whether the School challenges or confirms my error, and I think it confirms it. We speak about praise, but in effect it is insincere because abstract. Praise is to do with love, and love is never abstract.
Maybe we in the School are united not only by our desire for truth (which I would never question) but also by the flavour of truth with which we are comfortable?
Maybe the way forward is to start to look at the things that make us personally uncomfortable?
What do you think?
I agree with the spirit of what is being said. I can see the possibility of praise fueling ego, or “what do you think?” leading to getting lost in opinions… but I think the spirit of the proposal is this:
We need to meet the reality of the situation in order to be able to respond to it accurately. If one thinks the rope is a snake, then goes and tries to kill it then the response is clearly not the right one? So questions like, “What do you think?” are necessary to help clarify the position of the ‘other’ so that our responses can be refined. Maybe we’ve missed something they were saying? Maybe, in more clearly hearing their position, the correct response is more likely to arise?
This does seem to come back to an over-generalisation of the Gurdjieffian principle of “Speak the truth. Don’t consider the other.” The problem seems to be – to use a DIY analogy – you’re sent off to do a job by the IC with the thought, “I’m going to make this tool fit, regardless of what I actually find.” Of course, what you actually find depends upon you first surveying and taking in the needs of the situation. Seeing it clearly. Then you can go and find the right tool for the job. The 'right tool' isn't necessarily a statement of 'ultimate truth'. It's whatever is necessary.
This is the problem of principle becoming indistinguishable from prejudice. A pre-judgment of what what is there? So I think the spirit of the proposal – why we listen, clarify, etc is so that we are better able to select the right tool to respond? Otherwise we are trying to force something and it doesn’t work. It just leaves the ‘other’ with the feeling, “they haven’t heard a word I said, so why should I bother to speak?”
“Like an echo down a canyon
Never coming back as clear
Lately I just judge the distance
Not the words I hear.”
~ Bob Seger
Hooray for Anonymous and Kevin and Son of Moses and Kapila for throwing light on some of the most binding and subtle obstacles in the School.
I laughed out loud at Anon's School crib to Kevin's three points. Oh, the recognition! And, yes, this blog is the homework for the wider arena.
SoM - saying - and meaning - that you've got it wrong is the most tremendous release. I think you've spoken for us all here. It's such an effort to maintain and defend a position on shaky ground, whereas giving in conserves and enhances energy, not only for oneself but for all those with whom you are in contact.
The difficulty in the mind is that, by so doing, it may appear that they have 'won' and you have 'lost' but, taking the long view, this is far from the case. Even an enemy may be defeated, or rendered harmless, by being encouraged by a retreat, as Tai Chi shows us.
How much more fruitful is it to give in to a companion walking step by step?
I, too, find difficulty in praise for the reasons spoken of here, but, given spontaneously and without reservation, it is surely only a mark of generosity. And with that we can concur?
And on that note, don't be too hard on yourself, I'd say. Being prepared to sally forth and risk the knocks is being open to life. He who never makes mistakes never makes anything.
I shall also be at the Gangaji meeting on 17 May - so see you there Ka and Ke
"He who never makes mistakes never makes anything."
Too right, Laura. We are very focused on not making mistakes, admitting weakness, etc, missing the point that it is only the ahankara that worries about its position in this way.
Katharine said...
"And can I cheekily take this opportunity to tell everyone who reads this blog and may be interested that Gangaji's visit to London is now imminent? ... I think it would be excellent if you came. What do you think...?"
I am coming on the 17th.
Here a Gangaji quote:
"My teacher told me to stop where you are, just stop. That is really, basically what I offer you. I guarantee that if you are willing to investigate for yourself, you’ll find, in the heart of the matter, peace. There may be pain right before the moment of investigation, and there may be disbelief or denial of what’s found. But if there’s a willingness to stop following any thought, you will find even deeper peace and fulfillment. Finally, you will recognize you are discovering the truth of who you are."
I AM GOING TO BE OFFLINE FOR APPROX. 8 DAYS
.
May I offer from bitter personal experience, on 'the moment of praise' ?
When you hear or see something 'praiseworthy', there's just a fraction of a second in which you can recognise that as from the self; acknowledge it as from the self; acknowledge the self in front of you as the instrument; and praise....what a relief when it works ! Then it's a shared moment of... joy ?
Why is experience always described as 'bitter' when it takes an adjective? And, why, Anonymous, is this particular recognition bitter?
I could jump in and given a reason or two but I'd rather hear from you.
Post a Comment