Monthly Archives: March 2014

Forgiveness

As Barry is undertaking a podcast interview with a member of the Forgiveness Project, he suggested to me that I should write something about forgiveness in relation to the Middle Way. This is something I am glad to do, especially after looking at some of the inspiring material on the Forgiveness Project website. I hope that forgiveness is something the Middle Way Society can actively promote, because it seems to me central to the practice of the Middle Way and of integration. All I am going to do here is offer an explanation of why I think this is the case – i.e. to relate the ideas of forgiveness, integration and the Middle Way.

Forgiveness is something that people often think they offer to others who have wronged them. I’m not so sure that this is the main significance of forgiveness. I’d suggest that it would be better to understand forgiveness as a process of integration overcoming a conflict that is both external and internal. The internal representation of the conflict seems to be the one that is most at stake in forgiveness, because bitterness can linger long after overt conflict has finished. What we need to reconcile, primarily, is the part of ourselves that is in conflict with another person with the part of ourselves that is in sympathy with them. If we didn’t have such a rigid view of ourselves to begin with, it would not be a matter of “me” forgiving “you”, or “you” forgiving “me”: rather, we each need to forgive parts of ourselves. Of course external reconciliation can play a powerful part in that, but it may not necessarily be the most important part.

Let’s consider an extreme example: suppose that a child is murdered. It often seems that few voices are more rancorously unforgiving than the parents of a murdered child, such as the parents of Jamie Bulger, who were opposed to the release of the killers eight years later, even though they were only ten at the time of the killing – see BBC article. It’s not surprising that such an event produces huge and violent conflicts in the parents that are still going on eight years later. Any compassion for the killer (who may be in a very confused or brutalised state) is repressed under the power of protective rage and desire for revenge. Yet that compassion for the killer is still present, together with a recognition that the killer is a human being not so different from the victim. The power of the repression may even be expressed through language that denies the human status of the murderer.

Forgiveness can only happen when that compassion, opposed to the protective or retaliatory feelings, is accessed and reconciled with those feelings. When that happens, the protective feelings can finally be channelled in a productive direction that values the welfare of the offender as well as that of the offended. If we think about what might create barriers to that process, the relevance of the Middle Way also becomes evident, for it is metaphysical views that block that integration process. Those views might take the form of absolute beliefs about retaliatory justice in the case of a criminal offence. But there are also beliefs about the self that lead us to identify what we have lost as ‘me’ or ‘mine’, Forgiveness_Barkamenbeliefs about the other as absolutely evil, or even beliefs about God, or other religious or political absolutes. These might stand in the way of forgiveness, because they stop us incrementalising our loss and considering it is the same terms as the losses of those who have wronged us.

Of course there’s also an alternative extreme – that of denying one’s own feelings and engaging in false and premature forgiveness. Forgiveness is not just a matter of telling people we forgive them, or even of telling ourselves we forgive them, but of reflecting both on our own feelings and on the grounds of compassion for the other, whilst cultivating a more generally integrated state of mind in which reconciliation can occur and the two impulses can unite. The same point would apply if it is ourselves we need to forgive – the process of shame or guilt being a similar matter of inner conflict.

If I consult my own experience, I am fortunate not to have ever been wronged in the kind of profound way Jamie Bulger’s parents were. Perhaps the biggest point requiring forgiveness from me involved being wronged by an employer, nearly ten years ago now. I think at that point I was too much concerned with immediate harmony and reasonableness, and should have stood up for myself more at a crucial point. As a result of my not doing so, I felt I was left with no alternative but to resign, and I started to feel my teaching career was over. Forgiveness became necessary for all the wrongs I started to load onto this incident , but it took me a long time to reach. The marker of forgiveness for me was no longer encountering hatred for this former employer in my meditation, but for years I would suddenly encounter it without warning, and realise that it was still there. The forgiveness could not be forced.

It is the Middle Way that makes forgiveness possible – or perhaps, conversely, also forgiveness that contributes to making the Middle Way possible. By avoiding both positive and negative dogmas surrounding wrongs that we have either done or had done to us, we can also avoid either premature and superficial forgiveness or a rigid failure to forgive. Whenever we forgive we need to address the conditions of our own hurt, but forgiveness is surely promoted by the practice of the Middle Way at all levels – for example by critical and reflective thought, by meditation, or by art that expresses and channels our anguish. Forgiveness is never easy, and neither is the Middle Way.

 

Picture: ‘Forgiveness’ by Barkamen (Wikimedia Commons)

Giorgio de Chirico. 1888 – 1978. Metaphysical Painter.

tumblr_lzg5pzcJJV1qap55ao1_1280

 

The subject of metaphysics has been discussed recently so I thought it an opportune time to write a little about the painter de Chirico, he was born in Greece, his father was an Italian engineer. While in Greece he studied art at the Polytechnic Institute in Athens, he was to move quite often, between 1906 and 1909 he studied at the Academy of Fine Arts in Munich, de Chirico was interested not only in painting but also in architecture, music and philosophy, especially the work of Nietzsche who had interpreted and published work on Greek tragedy, de Chirico wished his work to connect with Nietzschean motifs, themes and his actual life, he believed that his paintings ‘could embody a philosophical message, a collusion and collision between Modernism and Post Modernism,’ he wrote pamphlets on the subject. Nietzsche had written about Greek myths, for example he discussed the relationship between the brothers Apollo and Dionysis, sons of the god Zeus, they had different characteristics but Nietzsche found no conflict existing in their personalities, he saw a fusion of these characteristics, unlike later philosophers who claimed that there was a dichotomy, de Chirico agreed with Nietzsche. Apollo the sun god, was characterised as being the dreamer, reason was attributed to him together with logical thinking and creativity, Dionysis on the other hand was the god of wine, chaotic, prone to ecstacy and intoxication.

In 1909 the family moved to Ferrara in Italy, de Chirico was twenty one, between 1911 and 1915 he stayed in Paris where he met many artists, he had rejected Romanticism and Impressionism, he preferred to express the enigmatic side of ancient myth, Picasso was also interested in classical Greek myths as had many Renaissance artists. De Chirico was called up to do national service during WW1 but was not fit for service, so worked in a hospital in Ferrara where he met the artist Carlo Carra, together they formed the Metaphysical Art movement,- Pittura Metafisica – the bulk of the work in this genre was produced between 1911 and 1920. It has been said that de Chirico reached a watershed in the way that the arts of the early 20thc. was evolving, he constantly invented and portrayed the body in new ways in relation to space.
The work of Freud was influential, we have thinkers today who study how the mind functions, but Freud was a father figure, his work on interpreting dreams interested many painters including the Surrealists, de Chirico soon distanced himself from the Surrealists, they liked to paint memories of their dreams where reality and dream worlds mingle, also they were made aware of the irrational impulses which influence behaviour as referred to by Freud.

De Chirico was impressed by the grandeur of Italian piazzas particularly those in Turin, he painted architectural scenes which cast long shadows, giving the paintings an eerie atmosphere which are rather threatening at times, he was obsessed with the presentation of enigma- ‘poetic revelations, the eternal meanings of things as he saw it or the enigma of things and bodies.’ His landscapes and dark toned skies created a sense of the mysterious – De Chirico’s use of titles such as The Enigma of the Oracle and the Enigma of an Autumn Afternoon helped to further the mysterious character of the work. There seems to be no rational explanation for the strange juxtaposition of his images, we have to trust that these were his dreams and his interpretation of them, perhaps they emerged from somewhere deep in his conscious or unconscious mind, it would be interesting to hear your views?

I have chosen his painting entitled The Disquieting Muses, painted around 1917, he was imagining the enigmatic side of ancient mythic creatures, in the background we see, set among industrial buildings, the Castle of Estense, in the front are two muses, Melomenes and Thalia, the muses of Tragedy and Comedy, one is standing, the other is sitting on a blue/green coloured box, de Chirico liked to use geometric shapes such as the box. The sky is a dark green with light on the horizon, is it dawn or dusk?  The main source of light comes from the direction of the lower right side of the painting, creating long shadows, a contrast between light and dark, the muses are dressed in classical Greek clothes they are like faceless mannequins, it was thought that to give them features would have lessened their impact as portraying the human spirit, they would become too ordinary. He uses ochres and browns, the muses are a yellow/cream colour, we also see a mask and a staff and the god Apollo stands on a plinth, he is the leader of the muses. De Chirico was for a time involved with the Surrealists as mentioned earlier, but they were to reject his work later on. At one time he was to reject his own work but returned to it when it was in fashion once again. Also relevant to this time is the political turmoil, where Italian fascists were seen in a different light from the German fascists although both groups were influenced by the work of Nietzsche whose philosophy I understand could be intepreted in several ways, working at this time were a group of Futurist painters who also admired the philosophy; speed and industrialisation was praised, no more Romanticism of the past, they viewed war as a unifying force for the nation.
De Chirico lived to be ninety, he married twice, his second wife remained with him.

The poet Sylvia Plath wrote The Disquieting Muses, here is the first verse:

Mother, mother, what ill bred aunt

Of what disfigured and unsightly

Cousin did you so unwisely keep

Unmasked to my christening, that she

Sent these ladies in her stead

With these heads like darning-eggs to nod

And nod and nod at foot and hand

And at the left side of my crib?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giorgio_de_Chirico

The MWS Podcast: Episode 15, Lesley Jeffries and Jim O’Driscoll

In this episode, Professor Lesley Jeffries and Doctor Jim O’Driscoll talk to us about Language in Conflict, a project set up to look at the potential contribution of linguistics to conflict studies by examining the use of language in conflict situations and resolution at all levels. They talk about the roles they have in the organisation, what they have achieved so far and their hopes for the future. We also talk about what conflict is, some examples of the conflictive nature of language, embodied meaning, incrementality and cognitive biases and what their understanding is of the Middle Way.


MWS Podcast 15: Lesley Jeffries & Jim O’Driscoll as audio only:
Download audio: MWS_Podcast_15_Lesley_Jeffries_&_Jim_ODriscoll

Previous podcasts:

Episode 14: The writer and journalist Mark Vernon on agnosticism.
Episode 13: Robert M. Ellis on his life and why he formed the Middle Way Society.
Episode 12: Paul Gilbert on Compassion Focused Therapy
Episode 11: Monica Garvey on Family Mediation
Episode 10: Emilie Åberg on horticultural therapy, agnosticism, the Quakers and awe.
Episode 9: T’ai Chi instructor John Bolwell gives an overview of this popular martial art.
Episode 8: Peter Goble on his career as a nurse and his work as a Buddhist Chaplain.
Episode 7: The author Stephen Batchelor on his work with photography and collage.
Episode 6: Iain McGilchrist, author of the Master and his Emissary.
Episode 5: Julian Adkins on introducing MWP to his meditation group in Edinburgh
Episode 4: Daren Dewitt on Nonviolent communiction.
Episode 3: Vidyamala Burch on her new book “Mindfulness for Health”.
Episode 2: Norma Smith on why she joined the society, art, agnosticism and metaphor.
Episode 1: Robert M. Ellis on critical thinking.

Meditation 7: The Hindrance of Sense Desire

The Buddhist tradition has identified five types of hindrances that get in our way when trying to practise meditation: sense-desire, ill-will, restlessness and anxiety, sloth and torpor, and doubt. The point of this list is to help people identify particular kinds of appropriate remedies for the kinds of problems they might meet in meditation. However, this list is also very useful beyond formal meditation, as the five hindrances could also analyse the kinds of distraction that stop us attending to any focused activity. For the next five of my contributions to this meditation series, I’ve decided to focus on each of these hindrances in turn, and particularly to explore the remedies recommended for each of the types of hindrance, assessing whether they seem to work. As always, I have only my own experience to go on, and will be glad to hear others’ perspectives in comments.Fantin_Latour_The_Temptation_of_St_Anthony

Sense-desire (or ‘greed’) is perhaps the classic caricature of a hindrance. When someone is seriously distracted, we might easily imagine that they were having a sexual fantasy, or drooling in anticipation over their lunch. The numerous depictions of the temptations of St Anthony in Western art (such as this one by Fantin Latour) show this caricature. In my experience, however, this kind of caricature of sense-desire is fairly rare in practice. When they have sat down to meditate, most people don’t immediately go into something quite as obviously irrelevant and self-indulgent as a sexual fantasy. The kinds of sense-desire we’re actually more likely to meet are more subtle and more likely to sneak in looking initially a bit like part of the meditation. Perhaps we anticipate the approval of the person leading a meditation class, or return to some activity we have been doing regularly in recent hours, such an engrossing novel, a film, a game, or a conversation.

Sense-desire, like the other hindrances, seems to be just a matter of habit. If you don’t spend your days having non-stop sexual fantasies, then you’re not too likely to start when you meditate. If, however, you are very used to being stimulated by a particular kind of experience and responding to it – whether that’s a colleague’s words, an idea in your mind, your Facebook messages, or whatever – when you withdraw that stimulation your mind will carry on with the habitual response regardless. But these habits then get into conflict with the part of you that wants to meditate.

How can we resolve such conflicts? Traditional Buddhist sources give five kinds of possible response, which are explained very well in Kamalashila’s excellent book Meditation. These are:

  • Cultivating the opposite quality and/or re-directing the energy
  • Considering the consequences of indulging the hindrance
  • Sky-like mind (observing passively)
  • Suppression
  • Work on changing habits outside meditation (e.g. being less self-indulgent)

These are all possible strategies, and I wouldn’t want to rule any of them out. However, suppression (which needs to be distinguished from repression) is a relatively uninteresting one that’s less easy to reconcile with balanced effort (see previous post). Changing your habits outside meditation is also too big a topic to tackle here, so I’m going to focus on the first three.

Cultivating the opposite strikes me as a classic Middle Way strategy, as long as you interpret it as reminding yourself about the opposite perspective and making it meaningful, rather than reacting against your hindrance merely to adopt the opposite extreme. The opposite of sense-desire is ill-will, but you only need to cultivate it to the same extent as your hindrance if you want to avoid over-shooting the mark. So, for example, if you keep thinking about that novel you’re engrossed in, cultivating the opposite might mean, not thinking how much you hate the novel (which would be rather forced, to say the least), but rather what might be drawbacks or limitations of it as a pursuit. Very often, this is just about giving yourself a wider perspective.

A more basic way of cultivating the opposite is to think of the ‘opposite’ in direct physical terms, so rather than pursuing a high energy hindrance like sense-desire ‘in your head’ you could concentrate lower in your body to try to connect to more basic experience. This kind of approach fits well with the embodied meaning thesis. In a sense, here, you’re dissolving the metaphors that have become over-important and bringing them back into central experience. Personally, I’d say that this is by far the most successful strategy for me with any kind of obsessive, high-energy hindrance.

Considering the consequences works less well for me. It involves thinking through what will happen if you carry on with this hindrance, the patterns that you will help to set up, how it will be harder to change them in future, etc. However, it’s difficult to stop this turning into a Jiminy Cricket superego figure wagging his/her finger at you. It might also distract you from the meditation and lead you down quite different trains of thought involving further conflicts.

The ‘sky-like mind’ option is the zazen-type approach to hindrances. You stand back (as it were) and merely note each passing sense-desire as a cloud in the sky, letting it float off. My experience is that this approach requires you to already be relatively concentrated. If you’re stuck in sense-desire you are unlikely to be able to carry this off. But perhaps it’s a more successful approach deeper into a meditation, when you’re already quite concentrated but a hindrance starts to rekindle. If you have a basis of awareness, it may be possible to just let go in this way.

So, my personal verdict from experience is that breathing low in your body and returning gently to the object of concentration is far more likely to start integrating sense-desire than any other approach. But I’m sure others must have rather different experiences, or the diversity of approaches listed wouldn’t have developed. Also, sense-desire isn’t my main hindrance – ill-will and anxiety tend to loom larger. Those who encounter sense-desire as a major problem may well have a different view of how to approach it.

The MWS Podcast: Episode 14, Mark Vernon

In this episode, the writer and journalist Mark Vernon talks about agnosticism, its relation to theism and why he feels it’s useful to adopt such an approach. He puts the case for why virtue ethics should play more of a role in how we live our lives. We also discuss influences such as Plato, Socrates, Jung and Iain McGilchrist and how he understands the Middle Way with regards to agnosticism.


MWS Podcast 14: Mark Vernon as audio only:
Download audio: MWS_Podcast_14_Mark_Vernon

Previous podcasts:

Episode 13: Robert M. Ellis on his life and why he formed the Middle Way Society.
Episode 12: Paul Gilbert on Compassion Focused Therapy
Episode 11: Monica Garvey on Family Mediation
Episode 10: Emilie Åberg on horticultural therapy, agnosticism, the Quakers and awe.
Episode 9: T’ai Chi instructor John Bolwell gives an overview of this popular martial art.
Episode 8: Peter Goble on his career as a nurse and his work as a Buddhist Chaplain.
Episode 7: The author Stephen Batchelor on his work with photography and collage.
Episode 6: Iain McGilchrist, author of the Master and his Emissary.
Episode 5: Julian Adkins on introducing MWP to his meditation group in Edinburgh
Episode 4: Daren Dewitt on Nonviolent communiction.
Episode 3: Vidyamala Burch on her new book “Mindfulness for Health”.
Episode 2: Norma Smith on why she joined the society, art, agnosticism and metaphor.
Episode 1: Robert M. Ellis on critical thinking.