The “need” to be right!

Several times this week I have been faced with the uncomfortable truth that, despite years of diligently working on spiritual growth, a part of me cringes every time someone thinks that I am mistaken, wrong or have committed some grave error.  Obviously, on a cognitive level, I know I am human;  that I often make mistakes; that most of what i think is right is based on my limited experience much of which is subjective.  Theoretically, I “should” be comfortable having someone else think I was wrong and not feel a need to justify my opinions or actions.  Well!  So much for theoretical!  What I know and what I feel often are not even close to being the same.    

Just the other day during a counseling or coaching session with a couple, one of them got angry and elected to end his participation in the conversation. Since that time he has refused to respond to my texts and emails.  This results in daily internal replays of the conversation and what I “should” have done to prevent this from happening.  It is perfectly appropriate for me to review sessions with clients or other conversations and to try to learn what works and what does not work in terms of my role as a friend or as a counselor. It is not logical to think that when one of us gets upset that one of us has to be right in our actions and one has to be wrong.

This duality, like many of the other dualities that we impose on our reality is STUPID!  Naturally, I know that my experience is my experience and cannot be your experience. If I come to conclusion X and you come to conclusion Y it  should not be a problem. Of course, if conclusion X requires that I hurt you, then there is a problem.  You would much prefer that I not hurt you!  Why in the world would I think that I need to hurt you?  Usually, it would be because:

·      You said something or did something, which I heard as disrespectful or discounting.

·      I am fearful that what you said or implied about me is true and find it easier/safer to blame you rather than honestly looking at myself.

·      I am fearful that you are going to do something, which is damaging to me in some way.  For example, a 14-year-old young man was killed recently because he was to testify against someone in court.

·      If others believe your opinion of me  or what I think is your opinion of me than they will not love or respect me.

Mercy me!  I certainly do have an active mind.  I am again reminded of a conversation with a six year old about why we humans seem to think that we need to prove that we are right and the other person(s) is wrong.

Today, let’s call our six year old, Samantha who wants to be called Sam.

Sam:  Mr. Jim, why is Johnny dad going to fight in Afghanistan?

Jim:   Sam, Johnny’s dad is going to help the good people in Afghanistan fight the bad people there.

Sam:  How do they know who the bad people are? I saw picture on the television and they all looked the same

Jim:  The bad people want to kill the good people.

Sam:  So if we are killing the bad people then the bad people think we are the bad people.

Jim:  Sam, bad people always say that they are killing the bad people but only the good people are really killing the bad people.

Sam: So, each side is saying that they are the good people and they are killing the bad people?

Jim: Yes, but we know that we are the good people and they are the bad people.  They started killing first.  They supported people who killed all those people on 9/11. Remember when we took you and your brother to New York to see where the bad people had killed many good people there.

Sam: Someone in class said that we were doing bad things in other parts of the world before the bad people killed all those people

Jim:  You cannot believe what everyone else says.  You live in a country, which is always just trying to make the work more democratic.  Do you remember when we talked about what democratic means?

Sam:  Sort of. That is when everyone gets to vote and then the big people, like you and mom, decide anyway?

Jim:  Well, it is different when some of the people are children. Mom and dad try to listen to your opinions but we know what is best and have to make the decisions. 

Sam:  Uh!  Okay!

Jim:  At any rate, often this wonderful country in which we live tries to make life better for everyone.  Lots of countries only makes it better for a few people.

Sam:  You mean like Sarah’s grandparents who have that big house and swimming pool.  We should make it so that we all have big houses and swimming pools?

Jim:  Well, that is not exactly what I meant.  Everyone in this country can have a big house and a swimming pool if they work hard enough. But no, it is not about swimming pools and big houses.  Some people in some countries do not have enough to eat while others have tons of food.

Sam: Oh.  Like the people we saw when we went to help at Catholic Charities the other day?  If we had a democracy they would not be hungry.

Jim: That is not the same.  Obviously you are not old enough to understand about good people and bad people.

Sam: I am really trying to understand. Maybe the good people and the bad people could wear nametags like we do at church some times.  Mommy said that Mrs. Jones is a nosy old bitty! She could have a bad person sign.

Jim:  That would hurt her feelings and not be nice.

Sam:  Could we just shoot her!  We shoot bad people don’t we?

Jim: No. We only shoot bad people who are shooting at us.

Sam: Someone said that the boy in Baltimore was not shooting at the police.

Jim:  Sometimes the police make a mistake.

Sam: So good people can be wrong?

Jim:  Yes, good people can be wrong.

Sam:  Bad people can be wrong?

Jim:  Yes, both good and bad people can be wrong.

Sam:  If good people and bad people can be wrong how do we know who the good people are?

Jim; I explained that to you earlier.

Sam: But I am really confused now.

Jim:  When you are an adult you will understand. For now mom and dad will tell you who is good and who is bad.

Sam:  Are you and mom every wrong?

Obviously, this conversation is not going the way I had planned.  Often I start out thinking I know exactly what I am thinking and how I came to a certain conclusion and then I try to explain my position and find that I am unable to do so even to a six year old.

For me, the basic problem occurs when I decide I am “right” or need to be “right”.  This means that someone else has to be wrong.  Even with this six year old I had a difficult time admitting that I had been wrong. I blamed her for not being able to understand rather than just admitting that I had no idea what I was talking about.

Many years ago one of my spiritual teachers – actually several of my spiritual teachers – suggested that I practice letting go of thinking in terms of dualities such as right and wrong.  Instead I was advise to make the best educated guess I could for that moment and honor the guess of others.  Honoring the guess of others does not mean I stand there waiting for them to shoot me if that is what they think would be the right action for them. It does mean that I can identify with the felt need to be validated; with the fear which often underlies the strong feeling that you need to acknowledge that I am right.

Obviously, letting go of this duality is much more difficult than I thought it would be.   I continue to notice myself getting into discussion or even arguments to justify my point of view.  It is true that I am sometimes quicker to notice than I used to be, but I am nowhere near being able to quit thinking in these terms.

Even in that situation which seems relatively simple I seem to think in terms of being right rather than thinking such and such worked okay for me in this situation. For example, I put bleach in my while enamel kitchen sink, which seems to work well in keeping it stain free.   Does this mean it will or needs to work for everyone?  No. If it does work for others that is great, but I do not need to be credited with the one who came up with the “right” solution. It is simply good that it works for me and it may work for some others. It may that others have a solution, which works just as well.  Being right would not add anything to my worth or subtract from the worth of another.  That is the real point of being right. At some level it is related, once again, to my need to prove my self worth by being right and you being wrong. I have to be better than you in order to be worthwhile.

Perhaps if we were able to let go of the duality of right and wrong we could work together to search for goals and solutions, which honored many different belief system or many different possibilities.

When I grow up I will again attempt to have a conversation with the six year old!

It is another Sunday.  I begin the day with emailing and  before long  it is time for the NPR program “On Being”  with Krista Tippett. This morning she was talking with Jonathan Rauch, a gay man who has been a supporter of marriage, including same sex marriage and David Blankenhorn a supporter of marriage and, historically, a staunch opponent of same sex marriage.   David tells the story of his first public reaction to the view of Jonathan being very negative, perhaps somewhat self righteous and unkind.  He also relates that it did not take him long to realize he needed to call Jonathan and apologize which, in fact, he did.. Thus began a relationship between two humans, one of whom happened to be born gay and found the courage to speak out in favor of the rights of all people and one of whom had little understanding of what it meant to have no choice about sexual orientation and, thus, had little understanding of what it meant to be denied the choice of all that the institution of marriage could offer. Both were, of course, very aware that being heterosexual didn’t automatically mean that the marriage relationship would be successful. One thought that it took a present male and female – a father and a mother – to raise healthy children. The other did not disagree that children need the influence of healthy males and females in that, but he also believed of the same sex could provide a healthy home for children.

Clearly each of these men believed that their view was the right view. This led, of course to identifying the person with their view which, in turn led to the other person being wrong. Wrong can easily lead to less than, not deserving of respect, not thoughtful, not as good as.  From there one can easily dehumanize the other.  This is the base which allows for wars whether the war is the killing of a family member or a country systematically planning and killing those they have labeled as their enemy.

Both David and Jonathan goal to treat others with great respect and to not dehumanize them 

As they became acquainted they began to experience each other as people who also had certain beliefs and opinions about a variety of subjects.  Once they got to that point, it was not difficult to eventually realize that they could learn from each other. They also realized that they both were interested in supporting healthy marriage relationships.

I was reminded of the film, “The Gatekeepers”. This film is a documentary by the Israeli director Dror Morch which consists of interviews with six men who are all surviving heads  of Shin Bet, the Israeli security agency (also known as Shabak)  Since the 1967 war the biggest part of Shin Bet’s mandate has involved counterterrorism and intelligence gathering in the West Bank and Gaza. 

The interviewed with all six men are individual.   As I recall they all, now from the vantage point of intervening time are saying basically the same thing now.  They are saying (my words):

·      In any conflict the goal quickly becomes to punish not justice.

·      If we ever to have peace it will have to be because we take the risk of sitting down with each other as humans  without the labels of nationality, religion,  job or any others.

It seems we humans keep coming against the same basic truth, that we are all  the same.  We all want to be loved, respected and to have a sense  that what we think and feel matters.    When listening to a talk by Eckhart Tolle later at the gym this morning, he reminded me that zen is doing one thing at a time. In other words it is being present without thinking about the past or the future; without making up a story about what I am experiencing which usually contains some judgments or opinions.    Dictionary.com defines Zen as: “An approach to religion, arising from Buddhism, that seeks religious enlightenment by meditation in which there is no consciousness of self.” 

Many of us have had that experience of falling in love or  being with another person with whom it just feels right to be with them with no need for talk.  We have also “lost ourselves’ in a sunset, a new flower in our garden, the sound  of a voice or an instrument, an experience of  just enjoying food; that time when we are just present and feel no need to comment.  We may then comment on not having any comment and, thus, are no longer present.  

I am frequently aware of how often I feel a need to label another person, group or country.  The label always contains a history and a set of instructions (habits) of how and what to think.



Of course, the other part of this process is the need to have my story be the “right” or “correct” one.  In order for me to be right or correct it is necessary for the other person or group to be wrong.  If Jonathan was right David had to be wrong. If David was right than Jonathan had to be wrong.  Now one of them is the wrong one and one is the right one. They are no longer just humans needing and wanting to be the best they can be.

In actuality, they are both men wanting we humans to have healthy, loving homes, safe homes for ourselves and our children.

Each of those persons is easy to love and respect. 

We could/I could apply the same principle to that person I am tempted to label as the  most radical thinker or the most benign thinker.   If I can sit down with John, Susan, or Sam trusting what we both want a world in which we take care of each other and can live with a sense of purpose we will notice very little, if any, difference.  We may debate how to create the conditions facilitating that goal, but if we do away with the concepts of right and wrong we will be able to explore without rancor.

It seems that I keep relearning this same basic lesson.  Today I am grateful to Krista Tippett, Jonathan Rauch, David Blankenenhorn and Eckhart Tolle for reminding me of a very basic truth and doing so in a way which made it easy to listen. In other words I did not feel that they are being critical or shaming in any way. They were staring their experience and, in the process, lovingly inviting me to join them in their search to open the door to having a loving, respectful debate.