Criticizing others and our deepest fears

archive.thebuddhadharma.com/issues/2003/...a_facing_mirror.html

My husband was working on a dharma talk today, and was referencing this article above which focuses on our tendency to criticize others and how that originates in fear. It relates to some stories he is using in the introduction of the talk about getting along with others who have different points of view, beliefs, etc. In light of this he is also referencing St. Paul's discussion of love and the parallels of Christian brotherly love/charity to metta practice.

I took a look at Ayya Khema's article, and it is really interesting and I think gets right to the heart of something all of us deal with.

Anyway, if anyone takes a read, I'd love to hear what you think. I would quote the good parts, but I started doing that and practically highlighted the whole article, so I'll just leave the link, above.

Ooh, fun! I'm going to read it after I get my daughter down for a nap, in a half-hour or so. Thanks for the link.

I enjoyed the article. The part that resonated the most for me (perhaps because it's both helpful for me AND something I attempt to share with my clients) is that it's helpful to recognize emotional reactions even when we are unable to let them go at that time. I find that just getting to know the textures of experience is the first step of the process that allows us to learn how to let go more fully.

I just read it. One thing that happens to me when I'm deep into outrage over someone else's behavior is that I really, really want to put her in a box and keep her there. For example, when I was angry at my mother a couple weeks ago I really had pinned her as a perfect bitch and I was almost physically incapable of seeing anything good. I knew underneath that I was doing that, but I felt as if I was fighting for my survival and could not let any air in.

Now I feel foolish, looking back. I can see so much more complexity, but I also know that Ayya Khema has nailed it when she says that we get into criticism of another out of fear for our very lives. It sounds outrageous, but that's exactly what it is. So we can't afford to let air in when we're in such a frame of mind.

So much for my great enlightenment!

Laurel Carrington wrote: So much for my great enlightenment!

That would make a great BG button or t-shirt.

Thank you, Ona.This was a worthwhile read. I had a full-blown opportunity to apply it during an argument this evening and kept getting pulled back into a defensive critical stance, but I guess it was like returning to the breath. AK's points would come back to me and I'd return to some extent to softening and listening, then that itch to make the other person see just a little bit about where they were wrong would be overwhelming, until I remembered again. It was still mostly an argument, but having moments of openness coming and going did at least give us some breathers.

I'm currently working the Fourth Step in AA, where you have to put together various lists (e.g. resentments) including an aspect of what character defect of yours was involved in the situation or interaction. The reason I mention this is because the other day someone mentioned that they didn't like the word 'defects' (I don't like it either) but that they preferred 'hindrances,' which immediately made the connection for me to my Buddhist background. It's an exercise (I'm only partway through) that really brings out clear looking at one's own faults (and then one has to talk it through with another human being, usually a sponsor) - though of course, lots of us also have a tendency to self-flagellate which needs to be watched as well - as Ayya Khema says, we're either too big or too small, and as we say in AA we need to become 'right-sized.'

Having said that, I'm not entirely sure that 'don't criticize' is good advice as such, nor that the things we dislike in others are in fact things that reflect what we ourselves are like (though they will reflect something about our selves - as AK says, a mirror). I think of the recent Spiritual Bypassing book, which discussed the necessity to feel and express anger or judgement where appropriate - the question is the knowledge of where it's appropriate, and how it's appropriate to do so (this was contrasted to 'idiot compassion'). But perhaps that depends on how you define 'criticism.'

I also disagree that the fear of non-existence is the root of all fear. I know there've been times for me when non-existence seemed extremely desirable - and the Buddha listed it as three (kama-tanha, bhava-tanha, vibhava-tanha), craving for sense pleasure, craving for being/becoming, and craving for not being/becoming.

I do totally identify about 'fear of blame,' though. I see it in myself as a watching super-ego as well as a fear of being disliked.

But, if you'll forgive the nitpick, there's a logical flaw in the argument here too, because if there is no objective place to stand and judge others, then there is also no way to say what's a 'good deed' and what's a 'bad deed.'

I'm also on the fence about most of the "rules" she describes, but what I like most about AK's presentation is sometimes her humor shows through: "When we become aware that we are criticizing other people we should immediately realize we are on the wrong track. Our criticism is unlikely to be of use; after all, who has ever changed through being carped at?"

I think it would have been a little better to say something positive about why we have critical thoughts about others -- it is a very healthy act of discernment. It is protective. It can create the conditions and space for healing. That's all very, very important. It there isn't enough of that, then there's no foundation for the deeper work.

I wish she spent a little more time on what it means to do the practice. Basically it means opening up to the actual sensations of reactivity. If your level of attention is strong enough, then the complex of reactivity (thoughts, emotions, sensations, and sense of identity) will resolve into separate components. But here's the critical thing, if attention isn't strong enough, then you are just triggering old wounds and reinforcing the reactivity.

I guess that's why I don't hold with taking a rule-based kind of approach. A person may be anywhere in the spectrum from post-trauma to the verge of purification and depending where they are, the rule that should be applied is different.

But it is very true that when we understand, own, and resolve our own reactivity, "we will feel a sense of connection, of solidarity with others, as though they are our brothers and sisters." It's so humbling to be torn apart by the sensations of reactivity, you can't help but feel some compassion for others who are trapped by the same thing.

Edit: ...but like everything else in the world, it isn't so simple. If I'm honest, I'd also say that I've noticed that there can also be a bit of intolerance for people who are indulging in their reactivity. It seems like both forces (acceptance and cutting discernment) are in play and are valid options. Here again, it seems like simple rules don't quite do justice.