The principles and processes ofcontemplation are the principles and processes of communication anddialogue.
All dialogue is within oneself,with oneself.
The parts of our minds weidentify with are stated as 'I'.
The parts of our minds that we suppress are seenas the 'other' and its attributes are projected on to the personal orsocial 'other'.
The dialogue is between these two parts, ourdivided selves.
All conflicts are collective projections of theconflicts between our own variously identified or unidentifieddivided selves; personal neurosis equals and generates collectiveneurosis.
The purpose of dialogue is to re-establishinternal harmony.
The personae and societies that are in fullharmony within themselves do not initiate conflict with'others'.
If they do happen to come into such conflict atthe initiative of the 'other', they help resolve the conflict withinthe 'other' and thereby reduce the friction andconfrontation.
In contemplative processes, one brings tomanifestation in the conscious mind that which had been lyingunidentified.
One does not view these divisive parts asprinciples in opposition to each other but examines them to see whereand how they complement each other, and render to one the completepicture of oneself.
Nor does a contemplative person postulateopposites in the universe but observes and understands theinteraction among complementary forces without each or any of whichthe universe would be incomplete.
Communication and dialogue then becomes aninter-contemplative process; two together contemplate the variousdivided parts in order to manifest the picture of the complete andharmonised whole which will then become the new identity among themultiple dialogue partners.
When 'I' views itself as the primary and someoneelse as the 'other', so also that 'other' views himself as primaryand views my 'I' as the 'other'. The abolition of the 'otherness' isthe goal of all communication and dialogue. Then there cease to betwo primary 'I's and no 'two' seek to work in partnership, there nolonger being 'two'.
In the inter-contemplative processes of thisnature, the one, with all its parts assimilated and manifested in itsown 'whole' being, works to produce all that is beneficent to thecomplete 'All'. This is higher than altruism where 'one' selflesslyworks for the benefit of an 'other' ' the 'other' yet remaining aforce or principle recognized separately in its own right.
The inter-contemplativedialogue begins with the primary 'I'
(a) identifying that which liesun-manifest within oneself and is projected into manifestation in the'other';
(b) then, seeing this 'other'in oneself, one brings these different parts of oneself into harmony,finding a place for each as a component of the Whole, and
(c) thereafter, finding allarguments in support of the projected 'other', and voicing as one'sown opinion that which the erstwhile opponent, nowinter-contemplative partner, would have voiced if the two were inopposition,
(d) one begins theinter-contemplative dialogue. Each partner here proposes that whichheretofore s/he opposed ' and then helps the 'other', who is nowplaying the role of the primary 'I', harmonise the various componentsinto one.
The cognitive as well asethical principles in these internal or interactive,inter-contemplative, dialogues are:
* a search for the deepest,most un-manifest, layers of one's consciousness (achieved throughexpertise in meditation);
* not merely pacification ofcurrent conflict but the motivation for establishing internal andthereby external peace (non-neurosis) as the effortless and naturalstate among all constituents of one's self as well as of thecollective Whole;
* full cognitive realizationof the principle that the completeness, wholeness, peace are achievedonly by incorporating that which was rejected, that
* one reaches one's end goalby taking opposite direction, and
* loses by trying towin.
* Non-attachment,renunciation; the will to make sacred, that is,sacrifice.
These cautions are partialapplications of the traditional training in meditative andcontemplative processes.
Human beings are creatures of habit; all ourchoices, emotions and reactions are habitual. To de-habituate oneself is part of gaining freedom from that which constrains us. In theprocess we often tend to fall back to our habits and cancel out thatwhich we would have gained through freedom. In theinter-contemplative process we must keep looking at ourselves, andalso remind our partners in the most amicable way ( like a friendwith whom we are taking a walk in the forest and s/he is about stepinto a slippery puddle) that s/he is slipping into a habit patternand must extricate oneself from it in order to ensure the achievementof the common goal.
Human beings are reactive when subject to theirhabits. We must re-train ourselves only to act from a space that isfree of such conditioning. In the inter-contemplative process we areoften likely to react out of our conditioning and must observeourselves to maintain caution, and to help the partner also in thisself-observation.
Personal emotional insecurities and fears areoften projected on to collective (national, international,inter-faith) situations and are given the guise of ideals. A leadersays that he is securing his nation against the enemy but in fact heis shielding himself against some childhood insecurity. It will takevery careful observation and analysis to avoid such idealisation ofemotional weaknesses.
One often tends to lapse into 'What do I gain', or'What does that 'nation', 'religion', 'tribal group', 'company' withwhich my primary 'I' identifies gains' instead of sustaining theideal that in gain for all is the gain of each. One must continuouslyremind oneself that in the fullness of the Whole is the enrichmentand nourishment of all its parts. The roots nourished nourish eachleaf.
'Since I am unselfish (see how unselfish I havebeen as against the ever-selfish other!), it is my duty to protectmyself in the interest of others'--Such a view easily creeps into themind of each partner and must be carefully avoided. Rather, oneshould look at one's own failures in ethical practice and perfectoneself.
In all debates among nations, religions, spouses,it is seen that one tends to give examples of one's best behavior andthe 'other's worst behavior (look, what the Hindus do as against whatus Christians do; look how stupid the other religion's scripture isas compared to mine). Instead, one must fully study and comprehendthe 'other's view of himself (his country, nation, religion) and onlythen enter into inter-contemplative dialogue. Let not one bepermitted to lapse into the partial views that favour oneself.
Associative terminologies, emotionally loadedterms, used in dialogue can destroy the entire process. One musttrain oneself to avoid such loaded terms. The word 'idol' used forthe sacred icons of another religion subliminally suggests, andinvokes the reaction, that some dominant faith is threatening therepeat of history in which the temples of other religions weredestroyed and reconstructed as the conquering religion's shrines.Many such examples may be given. Without total respect, andrecognition of the 'opposite' point as an equally valid constituentof God's (the word God is used here figuratively) universe, nointer-contemplative dialogue can take place.
One also lapses into finding plausible excuses forone's wrong behavior or interprets one's motive to have beenaltruistic. One constantly needs to remain watchful against suchfavoring of oneself.
One starts the 'negotiations' from a position of'strength' or power, or from a statement of 'NO'. Since the purposeis to arrive at a unifying YES in all areas, humility and apologymust be regarded as the symptoms of strength, an inner security andnon-fear.
Starting from a place of fear contributes toaggression and violence as much as the exhibition of 'strength'.Trust and an inner peaceful resolution are the right mentalconditions from which to begin.
The inter-contemplative partners first find allthe possible common denominators and do all that is possible tostrengthen them. With this taste of gentleness they will feelencouraged to go further to overcome the differences.
In the search for oneness the words like 'NO' and'NOT' must be avoided; a whole new approach to language is essential.
The utilitarian and contractual approach (if yougo a mile I will go a mile; if you do not sacrifice how can youexpect me to sacrifice) defeats the purpose of inter-contemplativepartnership.
The principle of compassion, and not theutilitarian and contractual view, makes us feel the pain and thedifficulty of the 'other' as it would be one's own.
The end goal is not resolving a temporary conflictor avoidance of (further) confrontation but the full integration ofone's own internal self, be it personal self or the social, national,religious collective self.
Finally: Any internal contemplation or externalcommunication and dialogue must begin with a meditation session. Onlythe calmest mind will find its inward way into the space ofintegration and harmony. It will become a clear mirror,de-conditioned and de-habituated enough, for truth that is love toemerge from any inter-contemplative communication.
Full transcripts of SwamiVeda's dialogue with the Taoist Guides and Buddhist Abbots ofmonasteries are being prepared and will be available in due time.
Please visit this web page fora special report by Amy Gage from Beijing about the InternationalDialogue DIVINGINTO HARMONY.
© PROMETHEUS 96/2005