'Being offended'??

There is the incident in Buddha's life that comes to my mind when I hear about the whole debate between 'freedom of speech' and 'no platform'.  One of the basic bones of contention in this debate is offense (giving and taking). 

On an occasion when there were people visiting the Buddha, there was a man who came in and started abusing the Buddha.  But he sat there very calm and quiet.  He never retorted nor got agitated.  After a while, the abuser got tired and left.  The disciples then approached the Buddha and asked him, why didn't he say or do anything when he was being insulted.  The Buddha replied, "When someone offers you a gift and you refuse to take it, whom does it then belong to?"  The disciples replied, "The giver." And the Buddha replied, "He offered me a gift and I did not accept it!  So why get worked up about what is not mine!"

Besides, I know not if there is anything called 'being offended' - no one can offend me, unless I let them offend me.  Furthermore, resorting to anything other than verbal dialogue or debate, in order to show difference of opinion or contest the other person's views, is already conceding defeat! 

Everytime I get angry or hurt, I ask myself why is it that I'm feeling this way.  So rather than merely shut the other person up by shouting or insulting, I merely listen.  I then merely present my side of the story.  And then leave it at that.  If the person merely wants to insult me, by feeling insulted, I'm letting him win, without a valid reason.  And if what he or she says has a point, then it is for me to ponder and respond appropriately (both the other and myself - in the reverse order!). 

The same is true of 'bad words'.  When someone calls out, "Peter" I don't respond.  That's not me. So why should I respond to someone who calls me a 'sob'?  If I do respond, then I'm accepting that title!  

Rendering meaning

The dilemma of whether to use or not to use language is such that even to express its 'murderous' nature, we use it.  An interesting article on the meaningfulness of greeting cards inspite of them using cliches or outdated phrases...

Clichéd statements such as ‘I love you’ and ‘Sorry for your loss’ call attention to this double futility: language always fails but it is impossible to remain silent. Nowhere is this clearer than in the sympathy card phrase ‘There are no words’. Though the statement is true, in order to be given meaning it must be expressed and, in doing so, is falsified. This axis of articulation and absence, of speaking and silence, is the dilemma that language continually re-presents.

[Source: Aeon]

This is me

The following song from the movie The Greatest Showman, titled 'This is me' is a good motivational song with a catchy tune too.  A song for celebrating individuality, being proud of who and what we are, no matter what others think and how they categorize me. 

Each one of us has our own inadequacies.  However, only those most insecure will make others feel insecure.  Only those who humbly embrace one's own weaknesses, lets others shine through their drawbacks... and in doing so, helps both... 

When the sharpest words wanna cut me down 
I'm gonna send a flood, gonna drown them out 
I am brave, I am bruised 
I am who I'm meant to be, this is me 
Look out 'cause here I come 
And I'm marching on to the beat I drum 
I'm not scared to be seen 
I make no apologies, this is me

Mixed prayers

This morning as I entered the Chapel for morning prayer and Mass, I was quite excited, happy, thrilled and relieved... all at the same time.  Thanks to the information I received the previous day regarding my research proposal.

As we began morning prayer, I found it weird that I was reciting Psalm 50 (Have mercy on me God in your kindness...) today being Friday.  My present state of mind and heart was anything but in that mood!  And for the first time in years I realised that what I truly felt and the sentiments I was uttering as I recited the psalm had no connection.  In my heart I was truly happy but here I was praying for mercy and forgiveness.

And I've been praying these psalms for donkeys years, everyday - twice!  Certainly I was only reciting, never really conscious of whether the psalm or canticle I was reading embodied my true feelings and state of being.

I'm aware that the compiled psalms in our breviaries are the 'hand-downs' of centuries of prayer and reflection.  And I can't imagine the confusion if the 7 of us in the community were to have the same mood and to choose the same psalm and then recite it together. But ...

Anyway am happy that at least for one day, on one occasion I was conscious of what I was reciting while praying! 

Persons beyond actions

Reflection for April 11, 2017: To see the person beyond the action

Jesus' attitude towards Judas is noteworthy. Here is the man who has already betrayed Him, yet Jesus does not throw any tantrum or make a scene out of Judas' pretense. He does not chastise him or humiliate him for his choices. He does not grumble about Judas to the other apostles when he is gone from the room. Jesus is also aware of Peter's betrayal by denial. Yet He still treats them both with dignity and respect.

We may say, it is because Jesus was God, He could be so gracious. But it is the same Jesus who cried out in agony in the garden of Gethsemane asking that if possible, he be spared the suffering. To feel such agony and at the same time not hold it against someone or anyone requires great vision and openness of the heart. It does not come all at once. One needs constantly to make such decisions in small matters of life, to achieve such equanimity at moments of great intensity.

Responding immediately to betrayal or hurt feelings by being angry is natural. Yet Jesus shows through his words and deeds that there are other ways of responding too, when others hurt us deeply… to see the person beyond his or her actions.

Depth

From my little experience of dealing with people of UK, I suspect there is an element of fear and anxiety underlying any attempt to touch upon deep personal matters. Not that elsewhere people go about shouting their inner feelings and emotions in the street.  But in comparison, there seems to be a sort of block, a sort of veil which everyone is comfortable with.

The few who do dare speak of their inner turmoils and share their feelings are often considered and treated as traditionalists or religious - someone to be kept away from!  Most consider it fashionable and modern to be 'trendy', to be superfluous.  Thus the avoidance of shared silence, deep intimate relationships, that extra effort to retain relationships, conversations involving feelings (rather than merely intellectual stuff or swearing), sharing of personal space and emotions... A note on silence: it is not that people appreciate silence. They do - that too fiercely. It is more as a tool to close up oneself, shutting out others, rather than shared silence.

I'm not judging, neither the people nor the situation, but merely trying to understand.  Certainly, it is not the case that every person or situation is in this state - but a sort of general ambiance.  Surely there must be several reasons for such an ambiance to be created.  Wonder what could be the predominant ones that led to this state of affairs.  Or I may be reading the signs differently.  Possible.

Pre-requisites

Not sure how true or false this attribution to Shakespeare is but all the same, the message is worth a thought.

Before you speak listen.
Before you write, think.
Before you spend, earn.
Before you pray, forgive.
Before you hurt, feel.
Before you hate, love.
Before you quit, try.
Before you die, live. 

Religious life, narrated by a 'party-loving girl'

There is a new book on sale here in England. Written by a nun, Sr Agatha wherein she speaks of her life in the convent and related stuff.  There is an extract in today's newspaper wherein she describes her emotions and feelings about her fiance.  Just out of curiosity (and a break from reading Husserl!) I read this two page article.  Read the article here. It is refreshing indeed.

Sr Agatha, with her three siblings

The narration is very realistic and truly human.  Shirley (Sr Agatha) makes no pretense of her feeling for him, even till the day he dies.  No pious or patchy expressions to camouflage her feelings and sentiments for him, at various stages of not only her life but his as well.  No lying that love for someone dies or evaporates just because one has become a nun/monk, all the while knowing the implications of one's choices and living by them.

On the whole, the writing and her sincere expression of her deep felt sentiments and thoughts make religious life appear normal. Not some hyperbolic sacrificial saga or a tale of suffering and pain.  

Sharing... from the heart

While our sharing based on our reflections on the Salesian Constitutions was good, it brought back to my mind some of the earlier sharings I was involved in, with members of my community wherever I was during my earlier years.

There was a time when I was 'all head' and would feel odd about people sharing their feelings and sentiments.  I considered them as not strong people or those incapable of 'delving deep' into something profound.  However over the years my perception has changed and today I hold quite the contradictory position.  To share something of one's own feelings and emotions in all honesty require a great amount of courage and maturity.  Only those who have a genuinely large heart for the group and are at home with the group and themselves can do so.

To expose one's vulnerabilities before others, one's own family members, does not make one more feeble or guilty; it actually strengthens one from within.  Done in an ambiance of sincerity and openness, it gives one the courage to face difficulties, no more as individuals but as persons who enjoy the support and cooperation of a 'family'.

Once we taste this sort of sharing when in a small close knit group of persons, a very sound theological or doctrinal exposition of a concept does not touch anyone as much as a downcast look or a brief pause after narration of a very personal experience.

Defining sin/love

While at Karunapuram, Puma one day approached me asked, "Does God get offended by our sins?" I immediately replied, "That's up to Him. If He wants to, He will. If not, He won't."  His next question was ready. "Then why confess?" As I reflected, an analogy came to my mind, especially in the context of that day's reading where Jesus meets and praises the woman at Peter's home.

One day I scold and say bad words to ...

1. a drunkard on the road
2. my good friend.
3. my own mother. 

Am I then comfortable or does my conscience prick?  If the latter then in which instance haunts me?  It all depends on my relationship with that person. Naturally, I'll feel more guilty and ashamed of raising my voice against my mother, than in the other two instances.  The more I love, the more I feel... It is also because somewhere deep within us we prefer to love than harbor guilt, shame, fear, hatred or envy.  I therefore ask forgiveness from God because I love him and wish to savour that love better.

"Her many sins are forgiven, because she has loved much!"

The Myth of "I know best!"

We are in the midst of a heated debate.  The topic being, whether children are capable of decision-making.  Most in the group were fighting tooth and nail, that we (adults) need to decide for the child, because the child is not capable of making serious decisions.  So we have to intervene.

I was of the other group stating that children, especially children in our YaR centres, are capable of decision making.  To prove this I only gave two proofs: the very fact that the child has run away from home (the decision to run away, a risk, a gamble) and to compound it the decision of the child to stay away from home!!!

As long as we (adults) stubbornly and egoistically hold on to this notion that 'I know best', children will never come on board. They will either become subservient, giving up their decision making skill and in the long run the very capability - another way of explaining 'institutionalisation' or 'making capable decision makers into impotent living beings'.  Or they will rebel, and turn out to be always opposing because that is what they grow up to know as a way of expressing themselves.

Feel, Do, Be ... Good

Often our whole formation structure and all our activities are geared towards, perhaps unconsciously, making one 'feel good'.  Whether it is prayer, work, study, relationship, apostolate... The same is repeated when the students complete their basic formation and are involved in full-time apostolate, not just in their early years but all through life.  Make people 'feel good'.  So we have 'good' sermons, 'radical' documents, 'smiling' relationships, 'high-scoring' students, ...

Some of these boys go on to also 'do good'. That certainly is one step ahead of merely 'feeling good'.  So, some charitable works once in a way.  Some heroic deeds in some place... the rest of time is spent on riding high on the good feeling that is earned from such deeds!

However, very few - very very very few - graduate to 'being good'.  Now that's a different ball game!  'Feeling good' is a form of escapism (from growing in depth, from being men of substance).  'Doing good' is a form of lethargy (can, but do not will).  'Being good' on the other hand, demands a sustained endeavour, a collective effort, radical choices and lifestyle in congruence with those choices, a steady and joyful commitment... there is no play acting here, no breaks/holidays (from being good).  

In between you have to manage!

Rabbi, my friend, send me this quote sometime ago.

You are loved when you were born. You will be loved when you die. In between you have to manage!

I always tell my Brothers, that love, more than an emotion, is a decision. It is a basically a commitment. It is a choice I have to deliberately make very consciously and carefully.  It is not something that just merely happens!  That 'happening by looks or chance' is only some wishful thinking or at the most the introduction to the introduction.  Not love itself.  

Demystifying 'community'

On February 12, 2013 The Hindu carried an interesting article by Sanjay Srivastava on it Op-Ed page, titled "Pathology of the hurt sentiment".  It shed some interesting light and presented some refreshing facts about community and feelings. As I read the article then, something struck me but I couldn't figure out what.  So I preserved that page and it has been rolling on my table (which is often clean of any papers except my planner) since then.  I picked it up again today and it occurred to me that perhaps there is some lesson for me about our Salesian or religious community in this article. So here are the excepts that led me to this insight:

A community is not a monolithic object and not all members of a community enjoy equal rights and privileges.  In fact, very frequently, the idea of not hurting public sentiments only serves to mask the fact that it is the attitudes of the most privileged that are being protected from criticism.  There are, actually, not only communities, but also individuals with different interests, and relationship to power and privilege.  

A note about the past, history... tradition:

When public commentators are urged not to hurt public sentiments, it is an an implicit plea to allow past practices and beliefs to dictate contemporary life. 

Continual glorification of the past is, in fact, a frequent indicator of contemporary cultural nervousness. 

Demands for respecting public sentiments are not only premised on the idea that there is a homogenous public out there, but that sentiments and beliefs are themselves unchanging.  Further, that the slightest questioning of an established way of thinking will lead to civilizational chaos, disharmony and social disarray. 

The idea of 'community' is, in the final analysis, both an objective reality as well as fiction.  For, we might, for instance, pray in a similar manner to many others (and the act forms an actual religious community), but to think that all members of a community must continue to believe in ideas that might have been prevalent a hundred years ago is to present a fairytale version of what community life should be about.  

Some bells about radical life of witness, community life, upholding tradition, preserving our heritage, identity, and the upcoming Salesian Brothers' Congress are ringing in my ears! 

Heart and Mind

The mind prefers to live in the past and is often lost in a maze of the bygone. On the contrary, the heart wants to live in the present.  It is in the here and now that the heart seeks to know who and what we are.  This collective tussle between the heart and the mind determines who and what we are.  Neither can we live only in the past - then we'd be as good as dead - nor can we live only in the present, then every moment we would be living afresh, with no anchor or foothold.

In simple terms, I suppose I'm reminding myself of the balance between feelings and ideas, something of what I learnt in the last week while in Mumbai. 

Handling feelings

Towards the end of the morning session, Ramesh asked an interesting question to the animator.  The theme was negative feelings like anger, revenge, hatred, sadness... He asked, "Do these issues which seem to plague us religious, also trouble the lay people?" He had a point in asking this question, namely that the lay people do not seem to be very much troubled by these aspects; whereas for us religious these really make or break our lives!

Reflecting on that question I would say that the issues we face are all the same - religious or not - for after all, we are human beings.  However, why is it a married couple somehow has the grace to live their  trouble marital life in a rather decent manner, while we make such a mess for everyone - including ourselves - in religious life?  Perhaps because we have the best of everything and hence the inability to see God's hand in what we go through.  Lay people are willing to see that because they believe and trust in God more than we do!  

Negative Feelings or helpful feelings?

During the morning session, among the many things the animator of our course spoke, something that caught my attention was this:  We always wish to get rid of all our negative feelings, those things that indicate the deeper pain and hurt.  And the best part is that these negative aspects of our emotions shield us from real danger.  Aspects like anger, fear, sadness, pain ... are all aspects which are there to 'protect the psyche'.

The animator was saying that this is the curse of our 'drug culture', wherein we would like to do away with anything painful or hurting.  We really do not bother to go to the deeper issues which cause these feelings.  We are quite happy to clean up these feelings rather than address the causes that give rise to these feelings.  Worse is when we rationalise or spiritualize these aspects and shove them off the radar (or so we think!).  

Identifying feelings

We began the five-day animation programme for the Brothers of the three provinces of Mumbai, Panjim and Hyderabad today at Matunga.  The first day was very packed... more intense than the retreat I attended last week.  Anyway, let me see what I can draw out of it. While I'm here I also need to sort out the issues regarding the next Brothers' Congress and related stuff which I've been asked to oversee.

Today's sessions were basically a call to focus on our feelings, and not hide or take shelter in our ideas and thoughts.  Using the Esop's fable of the fox and the grapes, the animator was trying to help us delve into our inner beings, to spell our feelings rather than quote our theories and thoughts. As part of it, we were asked to trace the source(s) of any one of our physical illnesses.  I really was struggling!

One thing is sure, I'm no 'feeling-person'; I certainly do feel safe in the world of thoughts and ideas!  

Insights from the seminar on Sexuality-2

Fr Joe during the seminar on sexuality and celibacy stated more than once that a truly inspired and inspiring religious or Priest will have three or four encounters with a person of the opposite sex where in he or she will feel that it would be great to settled down in life with that person.  He also was quick to add, that this is normal; it is healthy and there is nothing sinful about it. However, what makes this delicate balance of relationship murky is clarity of who and what we are and what we intend to do or be.  Blessed is he who is able to develop a healthy relationship with a person of the opposite sex for he/she that would certainly ensure a greater living out of one's religious vocation.

Someone during the break asked me, "How is it possible to jump in the well and not get wet?" He continued, "Fr Joe is asking us not to shriek from relationships with women but how does one still stay 'clean'?"  I shared with him what I truly felt about this:  Relationships are relationships, but what makes or breaks them is the attitude one has when one's dealing with the other.  Furthermore, if one is open and sincere, seeking the good of the other and knowing well what is good for oneself, both those involved in the relationship will benefit out of it.

My points for further clarity were thus laid out for him:

• Do I hesitate to share my friendship (friend) with those of my community confreres? 
• Does the relationship enhance the quality of my ministry and the ministry/life of the other?  (A true and genuine relationship will automatically do great wonders for one's mission).
• Do I have the liberty and space to express my sincere feelings and emotions to the other without fear of being misunderstood or manipulated?  
• Does the relationship widen my horizon to include more and more people or does it close the world in only on just the two of us?  (The former is a great indicator of a healthy relationship; the latter is a sign of immaturity in friendship). 

Emotions and responsibility

This morning I was discussing with my second year students about emotions and responsibility, in my Anthropology class. It was interesting to describe to them about the whole connection between morality, ethics and the choices we make based on our emotions and the actions that follow suit. They really dread my examples these days; for they are all from our life and living here in Kondadaba. Though not all of them agree or are convinced of the validity of the examples I use, they sure know that there is not denial of the fact of what is presented before them.

It was interesting also for me to explain to them the whole connection between emotions, choices and actions. Reflecting deeper, with them and later too, I realise very many of our own - my own - actions or habits are basically from the petty choices and decisions I make along the way. I really may not be directly and immediately responsible for the ultimate or the 'big' emotional outburst (of joy or anger) but I am responsible all the same ... simply because I've been making small choices every time I am emotionally charged and that has led me to this stage wherein when there is an emotional outburst, I cannot but decide any other way than in the line of choices I have been making all along.