I have an earworm, a phrase I can not get out of my head. Mercifully, rather than the Land of the Lost theme song, which has plagued me for over thirty years, this mental loop is from a lecture series I attended a few weeks ago. I am reminded of it nearly every day. Each time it retreats from my consciousness, it surfaces at the first opportunity.
A few weeks ago, I had the opportunity to attend an outstanding weekend conference held by Maitripa College. It was their first conference since gaining graduate degree accreditation in Buddhist Studies. They presented a two day program called, Bearing Witness, Bridging Wisdoms: A Buddhist Christian Dialogue on Contemplative Practice and Social Action. The keynote speakers of this event were two of my personal heroes, Drs. Marcus Borg and Robert Thurman. Dr. Borg is a leading theologian and author. With ties to both Oregon State University and the Center for Spiritual Development, he is a Portland treasure. Dr. Thurman is the renowned Chair of Buddhist Studies at Columbia University and a friend of the Dalai Lama since they were nearly kids. I had met him years ago and remember the throng of people that buzzed around him, like the paparazzi you would associate with his daughter Uma. It was Dr. Thurman who spoke the words that I have not been able to shake.
The topic that morning was responsible social action, a common theme in this blog and on campuses in general. In particular, Dr. Thurman discussed the concept of Right Speech. In Buddhism, the eight practices that lead to the cessation of suffering are called the Eightfold Path. The third tenant of this path is Right Speech. “Speak only the speech that neither torments self nor does harm to others.” (Khaddaka Nikiya, Theragatha 21) When we speak, said Dr. Thurman, we enter the mind of another person. For the time in which we are speaking, we are guiding the thoughts of that person and filling their minds with our thoughts. Language is uniquely powerful that way. Words matter.
“So we have an obligation to speak meaningfully, because we should desire to activate people’s minds. But if you speak a lot of nonsense, you are filling their minds up with a lot of nonsense.”
Those two sentences on right speech have been on my mind a lot lately. As I write this, it is November 5 and as of last night the election cycle is finally over. No matter your political stripes, this election has been an interesting one for fans of rhetoric. Whether in the soaring inspirational style of the President Elect or the relentlessly folksy idioms of the fallen Veep, many speeches and interviews of the season have been undeniably memorable. How will we remember the words of this past campaign? As expressed in last night’s acceptance speech, I hope that we will all forget the divisive language of negative advertising. But more than that, we should try to forget the nonsense.
I watched an interview with Joe the Plumber on Larry King this week and I thought to myself later that this was five minutes of my life I would never get back. Five minutes that Joe Wurzelbacher was allowed to get inside my brain and clog up my pipes with confused nonsense. But “good old Joe” was far from the worst. Liberal and conservative pundits alike appeared on split screens on every news channel, filling the air with equal stupidity. If a talking head spouts obvious hate speech, most of us have a filter that can kick in. By the end, what seemed even more insidious to me was the unmitigated nonsense.
Perhaps the one thing everyone can agree on, if we strip away the partisanship of the election, is that the person who won this cycle was the one who proved most skilled at language, able to sway the hearts of the masses. He understood the power of words and the public hunger for intelligent conversation, “to activate the mind.” To use words like a key, unlocking neurological switches in our brains.
Hope. Change.
These are the mantras that express the current zeitgeist.
It is not that we do not know the power of words but that we forget. Research in speech and language pathologies is prevalent, from hemispheric brain injury to stroke, progressive neurological conditions and autism research. Also research, especially akin to CAM, on what effects that music, poetry, and mantra have on the language centers of the brain. I can hardly turn on OPB these days without hearing an interview with Oliver Sacks. And with our electing of this particular Senator, it is clear that we are quite conscious of the power of language. But yet it seems we fluctuate between knowing this and forgetting this when it comes to our own lives.
Whenever I think of the power of words in this sort of context, I am reminded of hypnosis. It is amazing to me that we so easily forget the fact that a thing like hypnosis even exists. I know I am a hopeless nerd to quote from the X Files, especially from an episode as campy as “Jose Chung’s from Outer Space”, but it is one of my favorite hours of television to have aired in the late 1990’s. The episode is about hypnosis and our fluid perception of reality. How is it that our sense of who and where we are can be so fundamentally changed by nothing more complicated than the slow, deliberate use of words? Think of it. Not even music or poetry, but simply the resonance of the spoken word.
Jose Chung (played brilliantly by Charles Nelson Reilly by the way) is discussing with Agent Scully his research on mind control.
Chung: “I was interested in how the C.I.A., when conducting their MK-Ultra mind control experiments back in the ’50s, had no idea how hypnosis worked…Or what it was.”
Scully: “No one still knows.”
Chung: “Still, as a storyteller, I’m fascinated how a person’s sense of consciousness can be so transformed by nothing more magical than listening to words. Mere words.”
When talking to a patient, a professor or student, a co-worker, or an ill-informed member of the American electorate- on either side, please chose your words wisely, and above all, First, do no harm.
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
It may surprise you to learn that unfortunately Robert Thurman does not practice what he preaches and uses his words to bring harm. I am a Kadampa Buddhist and practice sincerely. Motivated by political aims and his attachment to the Dalai Lama, Thurman has used his powerful speech to bring harm to our tradition calling it the ‘Taliban of Buddhism’ and that we are ‘funded by the Chinese’. This is nonsense and his divisive speech is bringing huge amounts of physical, emotional and spiritual harm to Buddhist practitioners. He recently been asked to substantiate his comments with evidence. He has not replied. Check westernshugdensociety.org
I should start by reminding readers that I am not a practicing Buddhist. As a member of the Anglican church, who also are going through a very public and media fueled “schism”, it does my heart good to have people reminded that it is not only the Abrahamic traditions that suffer from religious infighting and partisanship!
But seriously, I was not aware that Thurman discussed the New Kadampa Tradition (NKT) in this way, but am not entirely surprised. However, the first thing I must say concerns my main point, the power of words and the need to sort out legitimate disagreement from unfounded hyperbole and nonsense. The website you quote, for the Western Shugden Society, leads directly to an “article” that purports to tell the true story of how the Dalai Lama was chosen as a child and his early education. The author, citing “various sources”, calls the Dalai Lama the puppet of a low level lackey, a dull witted student, a sexually immoral and easily angered adolescent with no interest in the dharma, a murderer, and my personal favorite, he is repeatedly referred to as a “Muslim.” Clearly, if Thurman referred to the NKT as the “Taliban,” that is divisive, but I would reconsider pointing people to this website as a viable defense for choosing words carefully.
So yes, I am aware of the NKT and this larger Shugden controversy, which has mobilized a protest movement against the Dalai Lama. Protestors follow the Dalai Lama around (they are the people that you see picketing with the “Dalai Lama is a Liar” signs), so they are hard to miss. I could easily find myself arguing the points that are critical to the NKT but I feel I would quickly lose the reminder of this audience and stray too far from the point of this blog.
But in defense of the NKT, I will say that Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, who founded this group in the 1990’s, is a brilliant person. His exegesis of Shantideva’s Bodhisattvacharyavatara, Meaningful to Behold, is the best I have ever read and is one of my favorite books on Buddhism. Also, there do seem to be many very well meaning and sincere indigenous Tibetans who have been ostracized from main stream Buddhism, by the Dalai Lama’s decree, for worshipping a local protector deity (Shugden) that has now been reclassified as a malevolent spirit. I believe the assumption behind the belief that the Chinese Government is financially fueling this controversy is a “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” situation. It is clear that the Chinese government continually attempts to vilify the Dalai Lama and it is easy to imagine that they would relish helping a western-oriented protest group gain momentum. But the hard evidence of this does seem mostly anecdotal, I agree.
Those things being said, I can not claim to be unbiased. I have a great personal affection for the Dalai Lama. I have studied with a few of his students and one of his teachers. Also, the lineage under which I studied the most is the Jamgon Kongtrul lineage, which is the foundation of the Tibetan Buddhist Ri-me movement, who also have disagreements with the NKT. I have also traveled and lived with the Tibetan exiled community and have taken on their viewpoints, with little deviation, as it pertains to the suffering that Tibetan culture has undergone in the last half century and the positive job that the Dalai Lama has done, for the most part, in keeping his flock together with an intact cultural identity.
Well… in the very least, per the examples listed above, words appear to be mere catalysts for change (”positive” and “negative”) and ultimately remain subject to the perceiver/receiver….
I shall borrow the words from two prominent sources:
A childhood rebuttal:
“Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never hurt me.”
And an equally fitting phrase, another favorite metonymic adage of mine:
“The pen is mightier than the sword.”
– Edward Bulwer-Lytton
Gratitude to you both for delving deeply into the defining attributes of corralled connotations. It’s a fascinating subject.
– C. Biscuit
Excellent content and style…keep up the good work!
Thanks for the ear worm!