The State of Mediator Impartiality

tricycle, the Buddhist Review,  introduced a new feature, “Dear Abbey Dharma”, in its Spring 2010 issue to offer advice to readers’ toughest Dhamma questions.  The column is authored by Sylvia Boorstein, a  psychotherapist and founding teacher of Spirit Rock Meditation Center in California.

Her first column is now on-line; it deals with a meditation teacher’s need to keep a balanced view on politics.  I started wondering what it would read like if the words ‘Buddhist’ and ‘Buddhism’ were replaced by mediation; if teacher was replaced by mediation supervisor or colleague.  Here’s the entire text.

Dear Abbey Dharma, In my lifetime of professional work in Canadian social service, I have gone from being left-leaning to Social Conservative. I don’t find a place for myself in any Western Buddhist sangha where being politically left is the norm. Even my current dharma teacher spews out hateful speech against just about anyone and everything on the right side of the spectrum. I have a hard time listening to a Buddhist teacher going on about how much he despises George W. Bush or Sarah Palin or people like me. No one but me even notices, or at least is affected by it. How can I remain part of the Western Buddhist community under these conditions?—Up North

Dear Up North, I would also have several reasons for not trusting the wisdom of a Buddhist teacher who, as you say, “goes on about how much he despises” or “spews out hateful speech” about any particular group of people. My first reason for not trusting his wisdom is his manner of speech, which is abusive. Another is the ignorance shown by stereotyping groups of people, such as “the right” or “the left,” as categorically unworthy. Another reason is the teacher’s apparently fixed attachment to a view.

I think it is difficult these days to keep a balanced mind about politics. Morality, decency, and kindness (fundamental spiritual virtues) have been claimed by both the right and the left as their core values. Political opponents are presented as enemies rather that adversaries, villains rather than committed civil servants with differing views. The issues— world peace, planetary survival— can be frightening. When I am frightened, I have trouble remembering that my view is just a view and that I could be wrong.

I think that calling oneself a Buddhist implies a dedication to non-greed, non-hatred, and non-delusion—a dedication that certainly transcends political stance. It would be wonderful if our sanghas welcomed political diversity and used practices of skillful speech to explain our opinions to one another. In situations that do not feel combative to me, I can work collegially. I can modify my position to accommodate others. I can recognize situations in which an attachment to a particular view has kept me from realizing a larger truth. What if we, as Buddhists in communities, were a model for the world political community?

You can make the substitutions for yourself.  What do you think?  It pretty much works for me, except perhaps for the last paragraph.  But I’m not attached to that view!

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “The State of Mediator Impartiality

  1. Aled Davies

    Mediator neutrality is a subject I’m passionate about. I saw Kenneth Cloke speak in London at the end of last year and he introduced me to the concept of ominpartiality and suggested that we are equally partial to both parties – I can see how this would enhance one’s capacity to empathise with the situations of both parties. I’ve written a review of the workshop with Ken Cloke. You can read it here workplace mediator

  2. Pingback: Tweets that mention The State of Mediator Impartiality | DIALOGIC Mediation Services -- Topsy.com

Comments are closed.