|
Awakening to Community:
Once upon a time in ancient China, the inhabitants of one city were constantly in conflict. Efforts at reconciliation had failed. Finally, the king himself intervened, had the citizens arrested and thrown into prison. Then he ordered that the hands of each were to be attached to five-foot long chopsticks. Cooked rice was available but no one could feed himself. The people were rapidly approaching starvation in the midst of plenty. Then, as if prompted by a collective dream, they started to feed one another. The lesson was clear. If one only tended the circle of oneself, emptiness grew. If each fed a neighbor, then – in this expanded circle – all would be well. Where do we begin in learning anew to recover and cultivate community? Often, in workshops, I tear up a piece of paper, place the scraps of paper on the ground before the group and ask, “What do you see?” For me, there are two ways of relating to the scraps of paper before us.
Communities of Different Sizes Arthur Koestler coined the term “holon”2 — a whole that is also a part of something larger — as atoms are wholes unto themselves and also parts of molecules and so on through cells, organs, and organisms. Humans are wholes unto themselves and also parts of friendships, families, organizations, nations. The entire human species is a part of the web of all life on the planet. The planet, in turn, is embedded in an ever-surprising universe. In this view, we dwell in nested fields — in concentric circles, of a sort. Starting with the principle of unity at each level will begin to shift our sense of wholes and parts.3 Relational Fields of Two The smallest relational field (larger than my separate self) is the one-to-one relationship. Such relationships come in a number of kinds:4
Suppose we make the shift from separate individuals as primary to relational fields as primary. Then, we must learn “to see two but think three”: the partnership and the parties within it. Think partnership first and then you and me. Examples highlight the differences. Consider two couples, each at their wedding, each ready to recite the traditional vows:
The second couple — call them the Oneness couple — starts from interconnection. They see that the relational field as a “third” reality, encompassing the two parties. This relational field contains shared purposes, shared values, shared history, shared defining moments, actual and potential, and is itself changing and evolving. The relational field requires tending, like a garden in which the two grow. The relational field requires recognition like a bowl in which the two are held. When things become difficult, one party to the marriage may say to the other:
Consider Kuan Tao-Sheng’s beautiful poem “Married Love:”
The poem recognizes “we are in each other’s clay.” Yet, we could go further. Think of each partner as a small crystal bowl filled with clear water. Each unique individual is a bowl with surface and depth. Next, see these two bowls as themselves floating in a third, larger crystal bowl — also filled with water. The marriage itself is a bowl with surface and depth. Here we have uniqueness-in-communion, communion composed of differences. And the partners can remind each other when they forget. Relational Fields larger than Two One-to-one partnerships are situated in larger units — families, voluntary and work organizations, communities, nations, the planet itself. As we widen the focus, several lessons emerge:
Let us think of the move to recover oneness and the skills to cultivate community as part of what Thomas Berry calls “the Great Work.”6 In other words, it is part of a paradigm shift from the modern world to an emerging ecological worldview. After five hundred years of high individualism in the West, this is a large step to take. We are not accustomed to seeing relational fields as real, not practiced in seeking first what deeply unites us. We are more practiced in seeing separate selves as primary and groups as merely the sum of individuals. So moving to a new paradigm requires skillful strategy — a bit of jujitsu. In what follows, I suggest two steps. Allow ourselves first to think of a set of practices in the old way and then take up the practices in the newer context. Skills for Community Living Step One: Leadership scholar Stephen R. Covey speaks of an Emotional Bank Account. In the banking metaphor, one can make deposits and also withdrawals. Here is my variant of Covey’s approach.7
Step Two: Let us shift the metaphor from banking to
Let us revisit the five practices introduced above, broaden them and place them in the paradigm of interconnection. Think of five practices of mind and heart to cultivate the garden of community: 1) Together we can cultivate a sense of the Whole and its Participant-parts. Here we rest in the awareness that we are already communal beings, already interconnected and interdependent. We honor the relational field and those within it. We can say:
2) Together — honoring surface and depth of each union/communion, we can rediscover sufficiency (or intersufficiency/abundance).9 We each have in ourselves and those who companion us all we need to live a life of quality — right here and right now. As Gandhi reminds us, there is enough for our need, not for our greed. Coming from oneness reminds us of the positive — what brought us together, what we prize about the whole and its constituent parts, what we notice in the positive core of our life together.10 Together, we are enough and there is enough A sign of coming from intersufficiency is the practice of gratitude and generosity — receiving abundantly, giving generously. 3) Together —honoring surface and depth, we can release from old surface stories and allow the deeper qualities of peace and joy and love to become manifest.11 We can certainly let go of “being right,” confront our own blunders, apologize and, where appropriate make amends. More profoundly, we can examine together our unexamined beliefs and emotional triggers. We can release those that are too small to live in. When living in community triggers old stories and old emotional charges, we can aid each other to recover largeness of vision and return to the bonds that support us.12 4) Together we can practice deep listening and loving speech — entering the unknown together13 We begin to realize that all beings are more mysterious than we know. We learn — in the waters of unknowing — to hear what is said and unsaid, the words and tone, and to pay attention to the images that are just forming. 5) Together we can enlist collaboration (partnership with) and move with emerging currents. Realizing that all beings seek to fulfill themselves, we can learn when to act and when to give space, when to advance and when to retreat, for the sake of the whole and its participant parts. We do not do the Great Work for ourselves or by ourselves.14 Aiding one another to develop and deepen these five practices shows us community-in-action. I think of St. Paul’s famous discourse on love in this context of community-building:15
With such reminders in place, even disturbances can prompt growth. The poet-mystic, Rumi, makes the point in his poem below:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Notes 1 In my book Living Large: Transformative Work at the Intersection of Ethics and Spirituality (Laurel, MD: Tai Sophia Press, 2004) I attempt a synthesis of the pre-modern and the modern epochs. For me, the move from separation to interconnection is part of that paradigm shift. BACK 2 Arthur Koestler introduced the term in his book, The Ghost in the Machine (London: Hutchinson, 1967). BACK 3 Once we shift paradigms from a world of separateness to a universe of interconnection, we shall find ourselves moving from parts as primary (separate pieces) to relationships as primary – unique relational wholes composed of unique constituent parts. This will start to shift our understanding of wholes and parts. For a brief discussion, see my To Come to Life More Fully (Columbia, MD: Traditional Acupuncture Institute, 1990), chapter 10. BACK 4 This is, of course, a Confucian insight. See my To Come to Life More Fully, chapters 2 and 11. BACK 5 The poem is translated by Kenneth Rexroth and Ling Chung. It may be found in Robert Hass & Stephen Mitchell, Into the Garden: A Wedding Anthology (New York: Harper Perennial, 1993), p. 13. BACK 6 See Thomas Berry, The Great Work (New York: Bell Tower Division of Random House, 1999). For Thomas Berry, the Great Work seeks to shift to “a period when humans would be present to the planet in mutually beneficial ways.” In this essay, I see the Great Work, in part, as a quest to take the best of the Pre-modern and the Modern and resituate their gifts in a new Trans-modern, Emerging Ecological era. BACK 7 For Covey’s original Emotional Bank Account, see his The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People (New York: Simon and Shuster Fireside Book, 1989), pp.188-199. For a fuller story of why I chose the five practices I did, see my book, Living Large, mentioned above. BACK 8 I am glossing TNH’s relational mantras. Here is basically how I remember them from a retreat at Stonehill College, August 2007: Darling, I am here for you. Darling, I recognize that you are here and I am very happy. Darling, I wonder if you are suffering / having difficulties. I am here. May I help? Darling, I’m suffering. I need your help. I am adding a sense of the relational field and how one partner might remember this when the other forgets. BACK 9 In the banking approach, I placed here acknowledging the other and giving simple gifts. Here, we acknowledge the relational field and its participants and see the core unity under the aspect of abundance or sufficiency or intersufficiency. The giving and receiving is seen as mutual support. BACK 10 Hence it profits from a way of proceeding close to that of Appreciative Inquiry. See, for example, David L. Cooperrider and Diana Whitney, Appreciative Inquiry: A Positive Revolution in Change (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2005). BACK 11 Here honoring “what is” in surface and depth and letting go of what no longer serves becomes the dominant practice. This more general practice of “letting go” includes but goes beyond simply letting go of being right. BACK 12 For a powerful way of working on issues of honoring what is and letting go of old stories, see Byron Katie with Stephen Mitchell, Loving What Is (New York: Three Rivers Press, 2002). BACK 13 As in the bank account model, listening is again the key practice. Now it is broadened to deep listening and loving speaking and deepened to include the context of unknowing. The deep listening and loving speech echoes Thich Nhat Hanh’s Fourth Mindfulness Training. See, Thich Nhat Hanh, Friends on the Path: Living Spiritual Communities, compiled by Jack Lawlor (Berkeley, CA: Parallax Press, 2002), pp. 265-266. BACK 14 For more on enlisting collaboration, see Rosamund Stone Zander and Benjamin Zander, The Art of Possibility (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2000), especially practices 9 and 12. BACK 15 Corinthians 13: 4-8 New International Version translation. BACK 16 See Coleman Barks with John Moyne, A. J. Arberry, Reynold Nicholson, The Essential Rumi (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1995), p. 109. BACK
17
Kathleen Norris, Dakota: A Spiritual Geography (Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Company, 1993), pp. 98-99. She references
the story as coming from Benedicta Ward, S.L.G., ed., The
Desert Christian (New York: Macmillan, 1975). BACK | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| [../../address.htm] |
Editor's
note: : In this installment of his ongoing Itineraries column, Second Journey's "sage-in-residence" John Sullivan takes a deeper look at the nature of what connects us and what forces lead to isolation. Our journey of thousands of years incorporates both historical perspectives on the nature of community and the wisdom of the moderns, reaching out to management consultants for thoughts on keeping our relational accounts in balance.
Imagine we can see into their thought processes. The
first couple — call them the Separateness couple — dwells in
the mindset of separateness. For each, self-interest is
primary. Each says the traditional words while thinking: “As
long as it is a good deal — good for you, yes; good for me,
certainly.” Quid pro quo. Score-keeping. For better, yes;
for worse, I don’t know. And so on through the list. Nothing
unites this couple except separate acts of the will. Is it
any wonder that when the going gets rough, they return to
the default position: two separate selves engaged in
self-protection? 
gardening. Think of cultivating community (much as
cultivating a garden). Next, put in place three new elements
to move us from separateness (parts first) to
interconnection (relationships first):
