Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
An interesting piece that made me think of intention and skillful speech
Rowan1980
Keeper of the ZooAsheville, NC Veteran
This post popped up into my feeds earlier this week, and I thought it would be worth a share:
elephantjournal.com/2014/07/the-hidden-violence-in-non-violent-new-age-communication/
Granted, they specifically mention New Age spirituality in this piece, but I can see the concept of hiding judgmental, holier-than-thou, unkind intent and mentalities being hidden by carefully crafted "non-violent" speech can be found in pretty much any religious or philosophical community. I feel that it's a form of spiritual bullying, for the lack of a better phrase at the moment. It also goes back to the discussions in many other posts about needing to temper compassion with wisdom, and vice versa.
2
Comments
I feel that it's a form of spiritual bullying, for the lack of a better phrase at the moment.
Spiritual materialism?
With regard to your link, frankly, and solely in my opinion, the problem doesn't necessarily lie in the content of someone's response to grief, sadness, attachment.... the problem lies in the timing.
None of those comments are incorrect.
What is inappropriate, what is unskilful, is the timing of the comments.
I keep mentioning Richard Gere's benevolent message for understanding and compassion from the American people, for the terrorists in the 9/11 attack.
Quite right, quite humanitarian, quite Buddhist and absolutely correct.
His timing really sucked though.
But really, really sucked.
@Rodrigo - It could very well be a manifestation of spiritual materialism. (I need to read that book now!)
@federica Timing is definitely a huge factor, sure. I remember hearing OF Gere's words a few years back, and I have to agree that, yes, as kind and well-intentioned as they were, his timing needed work.
@Rodrigo that link isn't working for me. Maybe it's this one....?
That's the one. I manually entered the search term in Wikipedia when I got the error screen.
Sorry. That's it.
Thanks for sharing - that it is excellent, well expressed and skilful. Timing as @federica mentions is important, as is intent.
As a very passive aggressive person, I have to get cushion therapy just to stop ignorance raising its arising (so to speak).
It is unkind and unskilful to present insight that may be true but is an arising of self rather than compassion for other.
It takes a great deal of insight to push a little Dukkha into people's being to allow a breakthrough to a more encompassing vantage. Most people do not have such a capacity, the required insight or the wisdom [Put your hand down Mr Cushion, before I sit on you - oops] . . .
Mouth gate/guard in place . . .
I do agree, Fede, that the timing adds to the relevance of the message, but I have lived two situations which are in keeping with the drift of the article and I find it so head-on.
One of them is: when our baby died, my Christian friends sent me messages about our baby being in a better world and God having better plans...
Regardless of the fact that I'm a Buddhist, these words sound so shallow and useless and empty when a person is experiencing life's worst tragic countenance.
I would not dare say to someone going through a painful experience: "Oh, yes, dear, remember life is dukkha, and impermanence..."
I would just cradle that person in my arms and cry with them.
Second situation: the person who wields spirituality as a weapon of judgement.
Who has not come across the average new-agey johnny who is always pointing out to others how unskillful their words are, their actions are, while grinning with do-goodness and your best interests in mind?
One of my acquaintances is all disguised in metta and karuna, but can brow you down in half a second with the bat of an eyelid.
You can actually read passive-aggressiveness and repression splashed all over her body language and disapproval in her pupils.
We all see it except herself.
Passive aggression, mixed messages - sadly all too common in these days of "body language" training etc. Honesty may involve vulnerability and possible hurt to those who do not appreciate a "lack of tactfulness" but give me that to treading on egg-shells any day, having no idea whether people mean what they say or not - or even whether they know? Understand and agree that mindful communication includes an awareness of timing but my ideal (not that you'd know it from my verbose and frequent comments here!) is to be quick to listen, slow to speak.
Metta
S
I loved a comment I read somewhere, and I wish for the life of me, I could remember the source:
"The problem with many people is that they listen to respond, when they should be listening to understand."
The adage of using mouth and ears in correct proportions, is a good one.
)
We sometimes want to do so much good with our intended wisdom, but we just end up sounding like right smartarses. (Smart-asses, 'across the pond'.
Very wise.
When we listen and hear the communication (silence too is an answer) we start to wonder how can I hear what is being said, rather than assuming what we hear has any semblance of full understanding.
Contentious communication is normally based around arrogance and pride. To use it skilfully we have to know and be aware of our lesser inclinations. Who feels up for that? Anybody? Nothing to say Mr Cushion?
I loved this article. It reminds me of how 'invisible' psychological violence often is. It's explained away and excused but mostly defended because it works! Psychological violence is quite normal. It's constant, this is a violent samsara when you get down to it.
What I loved the most about this article is that it tackles precisely that often elusive violence and bullying inherent in what would be supposed to be precisely non-aggressive, spiritual communication.
The human species still relies very much on the power of 'aggression'. The more civilized, the more sublimated the aggression becomes. We used to beat each other up to get our point across. Now, we imply someone's lower value than ours by being doggedly 'right' about some subject. We can imply this with the most flowery prose but that which 'hears' still hears violence, and responds accordingly.
You can't spit on a cupcake and call it 'frosting' without mutual collaboration. I rarely need another actual person to delude myself thanks to the factions and committees that I mistake for 'me'.
I sense people in general would rather not acknowledge psychological violence. It is 'weak' to snivel and moan (read: acknowledge) 'violence'. Buck up. If you can't run with dogs, stay on the porch.