Nothing to say, yet
Transcription
Talk: 19830722-Larry_Rosenberg-UNK-conscious_dialogue-1470 Start_time: 00:31:24 Display_question: How is real dialogue like communion and how can we practice this? Keyword_search: real, dialogue, conversation, question, superficial, communication, communion, ideas, academic, abstract, fear direct, understanding, information, eightfold path, dharma, teacher, student, friend, inquiry, experiment, fresh, risk, alive, insecurity Question_content: Larry: Sure. Questioner: Um. Larry: Could you pause before you ask it? Just for a few seconds. And whenever you feel you want to ask it… Questioner: This is a question, but… Larry: It isn't a question? Questioner: I'm not sure. I think it's a question of a different sort maybe. One of the things that I think has happened to us I’ve noticed in the group discussions has been that people have a need to formulate what they hear and run it out in front of everybody. So a lot of the times the question is buried in the way this thought or thoughts is used by the group once it's put out or by the teacher. So a lot of times it's concealed, maybe, in one way or another. Whereas the real information the person is getting is how it's treated, how it rubs against other ideas and positions that people may have. It seems to me that it's less clear than asking a question like, “What is fear?” But, it's nonetheless a way of working with inquiry and information though seems not as maybe direct. Larry: Yeah, I don't mean to discredit–and let any kind of question be asked. And that's what I was concerned about, squelching that. But it's more not in an abstract, academic way, but each time the question is asked for the person to understand what they were really doing when they asked that question. What was the job of that question for them at that moment? Questioner: That’s an impulse I have felt, I think too. And it's a couple of things I’ve said that’s been almost rather than listen to some piece of information, I wanted that information to move in the group or to get stepped on or… Larry: What would that do for you? What is this doing for you right now as we speak? Questioner: Well, it's doing the same thing. Larry: What? Questioner: It’s the same kind of question. It's using a formulation in the situation and I’m seeing how that formulation rolls along. Larry: Okay, so what? In other words, what is that doing for you, seeing that it rolls along? Questioner: Well, in terms of questions, it gives me an understanding, which I really just formulated now or asked a question about… about questions that don't seem to be questions or information coming from different places or in a secondary way almost. Larry: My question to you is: What is it doing for you now personally… at this moment? Questioner: I don't think it's doing any… well, it's deepening a sense of questions. Larry: Okay, and what does that do for you? Why do you need to deepen your sense of question? Questioner: Because one of the things, one of the reasons that we're here, I think, is the spirit of inquiry, exploration. And questions are necessary for that exploration, as well as other things. Larry: Let me suggest two directions that things can go in, and sometimes they're both the same. They're simultaneous. One would be something is said, a question or a statement, and then everyone participates. And maybe there's clarification of it or confirmation on the level of information. The person feels confirmed that their idea that they have is what everyone else has, or it seems to be had. And so it's a feeling of reassurance: an understanding of the eightfold path or some aspect of it, which can then lead to further inquiry and changes in behavior, et cetera. Break_line: But also at that moment, see, often in exchanges, if you look closely, what seems to be happening is that there's a request for information. It's a little bit, this is perhaps an extreme, but for quite a while–and maybe it's still going on now but I sense less so–when there's a problem in the United States, the government would just throw money at it, hoping it would go away. Break_line: And the same thing can be done with dharma questions. You know, we ask a question and we throw information at it. Sorta, “Here, take this one,” and hoping that it'll go away. And we feel better in the moment and we have a nice, handy little verbalization and we can make it our own and share it at parties when we go and people start talking. And I don't mean that doesn't have some value, and it has some function too. It keeps the people talking at a distance. I would call that at the bare surface of dialogue or communication. Real dialogue, I think, is synonymous with communion. There has to be a lot of trust and no vested interest in being right. But just all of us… Break_line: Although, for example, at this evening, I'm directing things a bit more because I'm playing the role of in quotes “the teacher.” So I'm directing it. And I had some idea that I wanted to experiment with. In a certain sense, it's a little limited because of that. But supposing on another occasion or just a few friends just taking a walk and talking, no one's the teacher, no one's the student. Is it possible that out of an open exchange, where we look at our fears, we look at what we're doing when we put out information, what, psychologically that's doing for us–perhaps serving as a barrier or what have you–that we all benefit, we all grow in Dharma. Break_line: And one of the reasons it's become really important for me is that the degree to which we can improve our ability to communicate with each other, let's say in this somewhat stylized way here: One, you can go deeper into yourself. That is just listening. If you really listen, total listening, unqualified listening. It's not just ideas bouncing off each other. It's experiencing the full impact of the other person and that can take you deeper into yourself, so it's not different than what we're doing when we're on the cushion. Break_line: But there's another incentive for me personally which has to do with the quality of life, of daily life. It seems to me that in one major area–perhaps the most major area–the human race has been an abysmal failure. In other words, we are a total colossal failure. We cannot live with each other as human beings. We don't seem to know how to do that. We have extraordinary technology and all kinds of things are possible and yet we can't get along with each other. Thousands of years have rolled on and all the books that have accumulated and all the sages and everything that's happened and here we are again. Two people find it difficult to get it together. Three people, whole societies. Now, I'm not saying that communication is the solution. But it seems that unless we're willing to expand the definition of what a meditative life is to include relationship and communication then I don't see where anything will change in any significant way. Break_line: So it seems that developing this ability to listen, this ability to listen to yourself as you speak to the other person, it has its value in this retreat as still another extension of mindfulness, bare attention, inquiry, but, to some degree, can carry over into very ordinary relationships when we leave here. Break_line: And I think the information part to me is less valuable because you can get that from books. I mean, there's just whole libraries of information on what the Buddha said. And unless that's delivered in such a way as to have an impact and bring you back to yourself, it's just filling up your computer with more information, which may be entertaining or interesting, but it's not contributing directly enough to transformation. Whereas if we use the communication process itself as part of inquiry, I think it has some potential, at least that's why it's worth experimenting with. Break_line: Now, personally, for example, in attempting to do this, there's a bit more insecurity. For example, tonight I felt a bit more insecurity than giving a normal dharma talk. I mean, I felt it because I don't know what's going to happen and I knew that I did want to. It was a bit of a dharma talk. But after that I did want to move with everyone as best as I could. And it is more insecure than speaking from in back of a set of whatever it is, information, so forth. But it's fresh; it's worth taking the risk because it's more alive. Questioner: But then I think implied in that there’s somehow that art of transcendence, then our way of phrasing what we really feel has to be more direct, perhaps, or at least from a deeper place. Larry: Yes. Questioner: Perhaps my question generated… Larry: What I found is that if somebody, when in a teacher's role, if somebody asks a question, it's a real question, it's an existential question, it brings out the best in me. It's much easier to answer it even if you don't know the answer, somehow it's alive. Whereas if the person's distracted and just doing it, you have to work a lot harder to meet them. And more and more what I'm doing is feeling that I'm doing the person a disservice if I perpetuate that. And so I'm trying to learn how to gently inform the person that they're not interested in what they're asking, or they're not aware of the fact that they're in a group and asking it. End_time: 00:43:50 ___________________________________________________________________________________
