June/July

The Disinformation Society
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

Talk RV: No Evidence Required
Robert Jensen

Muting the Conversation of Democracy
Bill Moyers

The Path of Self-Limitation, Cooperation, and Sharing
Richard Heinberg

Biodiesel: Growing a New Energy Economy
Greg Pahl

The Parallel Revolution in Venezuela
America Vera-Zavala

Grassroots Effort Creates Citizens Dialogue
Robyn Leor

The Myth and Necessity of Genetically Modified Free Zones
Jeffrey M. Smith

From Hurt to Heart
Eryn Kalish

Mudra as Meditation
Andrea Luchese, M.A.

The Klamath-Siskiyou Region: A Living Laboratory
Sue Parrish

How You Can Help Protect Endangered Herbs
Laurel Vukovic

Cosmic Calendar
Salina Rain

BACK TO TOP

From Hurt to Heart

By Eryn Kalish, MC

I was talking with a friend the other day who has a difficult relationship with a family member. My friend has a deep practice in meditation and Compassionate ListeningSM and I’m always impressed by how spacious and non-reactive he is even in the most challenging conversations. Yet here he was venting frustration with me because his relative kept interpreting this carefully cultivated willingness to listen as agreement, when it was not meant to be anything other than a show of respect and a desire to connect.

It got me thinking (again!) about how easy it is to teach Compassionate ListeningSM and other forms of conflict resolution and peacemaking, and yet how hard it remains to really make peace. We only have to tune into the news to know just how elusive peace making is. But it’s not just in national and global politics that we struggle. It is also challenging to make peace in families, in the workplace, in our communities.

So what goes wrong?

The number one thing of course, is also the easiest one to remedy—lack of skill. I am on several listserves for various causes, and I am frequently stunned by how much “blaming and shaming” happens, even among people who come together to do good. Of course that occurs more in email where eye contact and warm voices can’t mitigate unskillfully worded communications. But I often have to stop myself from butting in at restaurants and parties, or when I overhear snippets of conversation on walks. And don’t get me started about how I feel about how groups of activists talk with each other! I often think to myself “how on earth can we create peaceful and sustainable societies when this is how we communicate with our allies?”

The second reason for our difficulties, because its roots go deeper, is far harder to overcome—dealing with someone who is wounded in such a way as to make reconciliation very difficult if not impossible. Deep rooted mistrust born of painful life experiences, an assumption that the “other” is out to hurt us … any of these factors can make even the most skillful person frustrated.

The third reason is fairly easy to discover if we are aware of it operating, if not it’s quite insidious—having an agenda which the other person senses. In other words, our efforts at communicating are in reality at attempt at manipulation, and no one wants to be used. They sense our judgments, our pretense, our withholding of the truth and they resist being pulled into it.

The fourth reason is another tough one to change—we think this is just the way people are supposed to communicate. We grew up with conversations where people did not listen deeply, or did not speak their deep truth to one another, and we think superficial or conflicted relationships are “normal.” They are, in the same way that heart attacks and diabetes are “normal,” because they are so prevalent we can forget that they are signs of serious dysfunction.

So what are we to do? We are not perfectly enlightened beings and neither are our family members, our co-workers, our community partners, our politicians … if we were we would not have these struggles. But many of us are very well intentioned and really do want to build bridges to those others in our lives, no matter how far apart we may be in our styles or beliefs.

First of all, it’s important to admit that there are no easy answers. People are complex—each essence is unique and few of us live purely from our essence anyway, but are a mix of wounds and defenses, in a one-of-a-kind combination.

Next, we can check in with ourselves about our motives, our goals and intentions in a given conversation and be honest about what we seek from the others.

We can (and should), as a matter of course, reflect back to the other person what we are hearing. In the case of concern about listening being seen as agreement, we can very clearly state “I’m not necessarily agreeing with what you say, though I want you to know how important it is for me to understand where you’re coming from.”

We also have to be really honest not only about our own capacities, but about the people we are involved with. Can they hear you? Can they empathize with your position? Do they care? Do they believe in, and seek, a win-win outcome also? And if not, can you accept that and not expect anything from them other than they be who they are at this point in time?

And last we must keep listening to our own deep guidance, our own deep truth, which will help us to know when to listen, when to speak and what to say. In tuning in to the deep inner voice, we will be guided through even the most challenging of conversations to something that will serve.

Eryn Kalish, MC, is Founding Principal of Workplace Connections, LLC and Board President of The Compassionate Listening Project. She uses practices and tools from Compassionate Listening SM, meditation, conflict resolution, organizational development, psychology and group attunement processes, to provide those involved in conflict with what they need to heal deeply at the roots. Eryn’s life mission is to help facilitate global integral solutions to conflicts and she is part of the Israeli-Palestinian training team for The Compassionate Listening Project. Send questions about your conflicts to Eryn at SenTimesReaders@aol.com.