This podcast is offered by the San Francisco Zen Center on the web at www.sfzc.org. Our public programs are made possible by donations from people like you. Good morning. First of all, I'd like to thank Abbott Ed for inviting me to give this talk. It's unusual for anyone other than the abiding teacher and the tanto to give talks during the practice period. And the reason that I was invited to do this is because I've been part of the training committee for Zen Center and looking into developing trainings around difficult conversations and communications and conflict resolution. And because I'd been working on that, I was invited to give this talk on that topic and others as well.

[01:03]

And one of the questions that came up recently about all of our trainings and we just had a sexual harassment training at City Center that I understand went very well. And these are all aspects of supporting harmony in the Sangha. How do we live together in harmony? And the question is, how do these all fit together? So, that's what I wanted to talk about today. Is there resonance between them and the resonance that I find The first thing that I discovered was a book called Difficult Conversations, which I found very resonant with practice, with Dharma. And then Restorative Justice, which is an alternative to the adversarial legal justice approach.

[02:07]

And both of these approaches I think could be described as non-dualistic approaches to conflict. So that helped me see why I was... resonating with that. So the book Difficult Conversations comes out of the Harvard Negotiation Project, which started in, I think, 1981. And one of the people on that team and one of the authors of the book was actually part of the U.S.-Iran hostage negotiations in like 1981, somewhere in there, and worked in... Rwanda, in South Africa, with all parties to end apartheid. So all of this, you know, what became the book Difficult Conversations started out in international politics, like the most difficult politics going on in the world, the biggest conflicts, most intractable conflicts, which had not responded to other ways of working with things like basically war.

[03:15]

You know, it's like, okay, you have to negotiate. We're not getting anywhere. How do we do this? So it's an approach based on understanding. Very different to winning an argument. And it's been found to be very effective. And then it got expanded to corporations. So it's in a lot of use with businesses and corporations around the world. And then they started applying it to families, couples, employees, and employers. And I like this book a lot because it's completely jargon-free and ostensibly value-free, although the values are definitely on understanding and harmony. It's like how we are living together. How are we going to talk to each other? How are we going to get along? And restorative justice, I think, is somewhat similar. As I said, it came out of the adversarial legal justice system which is obviously not working well at all.

[04:19]

It works well in some ways but in other ways it is failing terribly. So it's an approach that actually brings together what in the legal system would be called victims and offenders and in restorative justice is sometimes called the author of the act and the receiver of the act. in dialogue, in conversation. And it's been found to have a much higher rate of satisfaction, particularly for the victims who actually get to say what the impact was for them as a result of what had happened to them. And then the person who did the act gets to hear how that was for the person. So recidivism rates are lower, understanding is higher, the fear for people who've been victimized is lower. So this is a promising field. And then I came across some agreements for multicultural communications, which was sent to me, I think it's been going around the CAKE, you know, the Cultural Awareness and Inclusivity Committee, these agreements for multicultural communications.

[05:34]

And I was struck by how closely they matched the suggestions in the book Difficult Conversations. And that's when I started thinking about maybe a way to look at all of these things and what might be a way of tying them all together is how do we work with difference when it arises? So what's difference? Maybe I'm having... different feelings from you or different needs. I've had a different history. I have a different understanding. I take a different meaning from an event which is based on my experience. The story that I have about what happened between us is shaped by all that's gone on in my life. All of my karmic conditioning has come together to shape the meaning that this event between us has for me. and the meaning that it has for you is probably different or we wouldn't be in a situation of having a difficult conversation or maybe not having a difficult conversation.

[06:44]

Maybe there's just avoidance because it's painful. Yeah. Also, we... Even if we're... I think difference... We're so unique and so individual and difference runs so deeply. Because even if we're at the same event and we're like sitting next to one another, we could notice extremely different things about it, even if there's no conflict or no problem. And maybe you've noticed this with family members. Oh, last holiday season, that thing that happened, it's like, no, it didn't happen like this, it happened like that. We notice completely different things, just based on who we are, our karmic conditioning, and also just our nature, how we came into the world, what we're attuned to, what stands out for us.

[07:46]

It's just different for each person. And Gregory Bateson, who worked in cybernetics about 50 years ago, said that information is a difference that makes a difference. So a lot of our differences go unnoticed. You meet someone and you feel resonant with them and you go on and we have no idea that there's a difference there. And then you get closer and it's like, oh my god, how could you possibly think that? So it's like difference pops up sometimes unexpectedly And many of those things, it's like, oh, so you like grilled cheese and I like egg salad. These are differences that don't make a difference. This is not information. But it becomes information when it makes a difference to us or a difference to the other person. And sometimes it's different for each of us.

[08:48]

That thing that you revealed about yourself might mean that I now feel very close to you. Or it might mean that I feel very separate from you. So we're constantly negotiating difference. And some of the times difference... Sometimes difference is really positive. You know, like travel is often positive. You know, we go into it hoping and expecting to see something different. You know, to experience something different, to experience different people, different customs, different cultures. So we're very open And we're very attentive to that and that's great. But difference can also be painful. And I think particularly it's because difference can make us feel separate. And when there's a sense of separation, immediately the judging mind comes in and it's better or worse, good or bad.

[09:53]

How am I compared to other people? Will I be excluded? Do I belong? You know, just at the most basic family level, will I be loved? Will I be abandoned? Or am I alone in the world? So difference is wired into us with very high stakes. So it... It can be hard to meet it, especially when it catches us off guard. I think the first time that I remember consciously feeling different, it was a very minor thing, but it had a big impact on me. It was my first week of kindergarten and I lived maybe a quarter of a mile from the school. We'd lived there all my life. It was a very straight route to get there. There was morning kindergarten and afternoon kindergarten. And on maybe the third or fourth day, my mom said, would you like to go back to school?

[10:58]

And she must have meant, do you want to go back and play on the playground? Because, you know, there wasn't... My class wasn't meeting in the afternoon, but she must have just, no, you can go hang out on the playground. But I didn't know that that's what she meant. And I liked school, that was fun. So I went back to school. and went back to my classroom and I opened the door and there was a group of children and a teacher all sitting looking at some activity and when the door opened they all turned as one to look at me. And I was completely thrown. You know, these weren't the kids that I had just met. This wasn't my teacher. They were all staring at me. Nobody said anything. And I remember I just let the door go shut. And I turned around and I walked back home. And I lay down on the couch.

[11:59]

And my mother came in. She was surprised to see me back so soon. And she said, what's wrong, sweetie? And I said, I have a headache. Because by five I'd learned that if you say I have a headache, people will leave you alone. And I couldn't even tell her what was wrong. I couldn't tell her that... I still can't even say, like, what was it? But there was this separateness, this sudden, like, all my expectations are not, the world is not the way I thought it was. It was like, I'm not okay. I think that was the root of it. I'm not okay. And, you know, I'm sure other kids would have been like, can I come in or... Whatever. And also I was reminded that there is a training in diversity and multicultural issues where you're asked to recall a time when you felt different.

[13:11]

And the instructions are just recall a time when you felt different. Nothing nothing to guide which way it goes, but overwhelmingly what people remember is a time that was painful, that they felt that it was uncomfortable for being different, not different like, I got to do this special thing, or, you know, I got, yeah, I was special in some way. Usually it's not that. Usually the times that stand out for us are the really painful ones, and those get kind of It's not even necessarily that there are more of them. They just go deep. When they happen, they go deep. And we remember them. Because they feel so bad, we want to make sure that we never do that again. So often, kids want to be like other kids. Let's be all the same. What are the rules? I want to follow the rules. I want to fit in. Then later we get rebellious again.

[14:14]

Difference is also related to impermanence. For example, my body is impermanent. Day to day it changes, but as we get older it changes more and more quickly and in ways that we may be less happy about. When we're younger it's often changing in exciting ways. I'm getting taller, I'm getting stronger. For some people, You know, development around puberty is very exciting and for some it's very disturbing. But there's some excitement there and as we get older it can be disconcerting. What does this mean that there's change? And change or impermanence I think is almost always related to difference. It's different now than it was before. There's some impermanence, there's some change. So difference is often a source of conflict and actually that's part of the definition of conflict is a serious disagreement or argument, typically a protracted one, a difference that prevents agreement.

[15:34]

So conflict, difference, it's all kind of there at the root. It doesn't have to be, it's just that It's what we do when there's difference and we're uncomfortable. And how uncomfortable are we? You walk into a party where you don't know many people and you might feel uncomfortable but you're just uncomfortable. You take a deep breath and go introduce yourself to the nearest person who doesn't look too scary and start things off. But when we're uncomfortable to the point of feeling threat, When there's difference and we're threatened, that's when things can get really difficult. Because we get fight, flight, freeze. This is our reactions, our physical body reaction. And when it's fight, we might start arguing or blaming or just asserting our own view, trying to win.

[16:44]

If there's flight, The flight response, going to avoid, withdraw, get away. Actually, yeah, avoid and withdraw would be getting out of the situation. And then there's freezing where we're still there and we might be looking okay. We're still continuing the conversation but a part of us isn't actually there. We've retreated because we're so uncomfortable. We don't know how to be present with our feelings and express them in this situation. There's something that's so threatening in that moment. So how do we work with that? I don't know if it's still going on, but for many years, actually I think it is still happening, there's a relationship lab

[17:45]

Some social scientists or psychologists, I guess, they have this relationship lab where they study relationships, particularly couples. And they wanted to understand, among many other things that they were studying over the years, how to understand what couples will stay together and who will break up and who will be happy and who will be unhappy. And they spent a long time looking at... factors related to positive things or preventative things. Did they spend time together? Did they have fun? How were their sex lives? Did they have common interests? Many, many things like this. And they could not really find anything that was very predictive of staying together happily. Kind of those two things. They weren't so interested in people who stayed together and were miserable. But staying together happily. You know, what predicted it? And much to their surprise, they found that they could predict with 90% accuracy after five years who would stay together and be happy based on, and they just observed.

[19:03]

They were just like observing their behavior, observing one thing, and that was how do they respond when they disagree? What do they do when there's a disagreement? Not a big disagreement. Just a little one. They would say, go into this room, we're going to watch through the one-way mirror over here and have this... Actually, I probably didn't say that. And have this... Talk about this, this, and this. So they would set it up so that there would be some disagreement at some point. And they would watch what they did. And there were four behaviors in particular. And if... Depending on, I think even one was kind of a red flag, but multiple ones were really red flags and were very predictive. So the first one is escalation, when there's a disagreement and there's like kind of nasty verbal jabs, you know, trying to get at someone. The second one was invalidation, putting the other person down.

[20:09]

Or a subtle form of that is like withholding praise when they would expect it. Or making some criticism when you'd expect, oh, that was good. That was a great dinner that you worked so hard on. It's like, eh, the carrots were overcooked. That kind of stuff. You can kind of feel in your body how it is, right? Like even imagining being in a relationship and on the receiving end of that. It's painful. Withdrawal and avoidance. withdrawal is like physically leaving the room and avoidance is just making sure that those conversations never happen at all. You know, kind of stonewalling. So not engaging in what's difficult. You know, that's often important. And the last one was negative interpretations which is being sure that you know the other person's motives and they're bad. I know that you meant to hurt me.

[21:11]

Or you don't care. Or you're not a good person. And hopefully enough, they did trainings with people and found that if they could identify those behaviors as they were happening and learn how to short-circuit them and do different things, that they could stop doing them and their chances of having a happy long-term relationship just skyrocketed you know so these are actually skills that we can learn and probably somewhere along the line they would have to look at like wow why do I do that well my dad did that or I feel really scared when this comes up and that's how I protect myself so these aren't these aren't fixed things but it was interesting that these showed up even in early stages of relationships like newly married couples really happy. So nothing else was going wrong, but if these were in place, over five years, people would get very unhappy and often not stay together.

[22:19]

It didn't say how often this happened. It just said they could predict it 90% of the time whether they would stay together and be happy or not. So, of course, this is couples living together. And I think it is not exactly relevant to people not in couples, but I think it has a lot of resonance. The closer the relationship is, the more that these kind of things have an impact on us. And I was reflecting that this is kind of a definition of wrong speech. We think about right speech. Is it kind? Is it true? Is it helpful? Is it the right time? This is not right speech. The Buddha said, monks, a statement endowed with five factors is well spoken, not ill spoken. It is blameless and unfaulted by knowledgeable people.

[23:23]

Which five? It is spoken at the right time. It is spoken in truth. It is spoken affectionately. It is spoken beneficially. It is spoken with a mind of goodwill. So these are some of the factors that contribute to freedom from suffering, to kindness, to supporting our relations in Sangha. And I've always thought that it is so incredibly significant that right speech is part of the Eightfold Path. So of eight things to do, one of them is right speech. of the ten grave precepts which we'll recite tonight at the full moon ceremony. Tonight? Tomorrow. We'll recite tomorrow at the full moon ceremony. Four of the ten have to do with speech.

[24:24]

Forty percent! And the precepts are all about how do we live together. You know, the Eightfold Path is how to awaken, but the precepts are how do we live together. Four of ten. Not lying, not slandering, not praising self at the expense of others, and not abusing the three treasures. So, in the Buddhist time, also, people had conflict, monks had conflict, And in the Vinaya, the original monastic guidelines, like our Shingi, pretty much at the very end are seven methods for resolving conflict, which I'm not going to go through. But they're very interesting, and you can read them in Thich Nhat Hanh's Joyfully Together, which is a book about how they work with conflict and relationships in Plum Village in France.

[25:33]

It's really nice. But I found this passage from the Spirit Rock Year Council, their Ethics and Reconciliation Council, and I think they've used the seven methods for resolving conflict because their teachings are much more based on the Pali Canon. It said, Buddhist conflict resolution is not based on good or bad, blame or guilt, winning or losing, offenders or victims. Rather, it is based on fully addressing the suffering of all concerned. Hurt, fear and anger are taken seriously through forums in which everyone may speak honestly, safely and completely about their own direct experiences and feelings. In looking for resolution, Buddhist practice values dialogue over silence. Reconciliation over estrangement.

[26:35]

Forgiveness over resentment. Confession over accusation. And atonement over punishment. So as we are exploring for Zen Center ways that we can address Sangha relations, difficult conversations, conflict resolution, You know, we're looking to models that have these values, which I find very resonant with this book, Difficult Conversations, and Restorative Justice, and with these agreements for multicultural interactions that I think I mentioned earlier, which is from an organization called Visions, Inc., which does diversity and inclusivity training mostly for organizations Very, very interesting. So here are some of the agreements.

[27:41]

Try it on. Be willing to try on new ideas or ways of doing things that might not be what you prefer or are familiar with. Practice self-focus. Attend to and speak about your own experiences and responses. Do not speak for a whole group or express assumptions about the experience of others. Understand the difference between intention and impact. Try to understand and acknowledge impact. Denying the impact of something said by focusing on intent is often more destructive than the initial interaction. You know, that's when... I say something to you and I know I didn't mean anything by it so you're totally overreacting. On the other hand, what you said really hurt me and I know you meant to hurt me. So we don't see how there can be and both can be true. I didn't mean it but what I said really hurt you.

[28:45]

So for us to be able to really acknowledge the impact that our words or actions had on another person is both very difficult and very powerful. And to deny that and to try to say, I didn't mean it, or you didn't hear me right, just compounds the pain, basically. Makes it worse. Now you've not only hurt me, you've invalidated me. And the next one is practice both and When speaking, substitute and for but. I didn't mean to hurt you with what I said and I hear how deeply you're hurt. Both these things can be true. Each of our stories, each of our experience can both be true at the same time. So this morning we chanted Genja Koan and there was a passage that really resonated for me.

[29:52]

relative to this. When Dharma does not fill your whole body and mind, you think it is already sufficient. When Dharma fills your body and mind, you understand that something is missing. For example, when you sail out in a boat to the middle of an ocean where no land is in sight and view the four directions, the ocean looks circular and does not look any other way. And I think this must have been part of Dogen's experience. He wrote this not long after he came back from China. He'd gone from Japan to China. At that time, terrible sea passage going across. To find a teacher, and he did. He found Ru Jing, and awakened, and was bringing his understanding back to Japan. And, you know, with this... clear mind of awakening, I can imagine him, you know, sailing off from the shore and then being, for just a second time in his life, out in the middle of the ocean, you know, where no land is in sight.

[30:59]

You know, he knows there's land on both sides, but he can't see it. Right now, all he can see is ocean and the ocean looks circular and it actually doesn't look any other way. Right now, from his point of view, it doesn't look any other way. The ocean is neither round nor square. Its features are infinite in variety. It is like a palace. It is like a jewel. It only looks circular as far as you can see at that time. All things are like this. Later he says, it is possible to illustrate this with more analogies. Practice, enlightenment and people are like this. So whatever features you're seeing of another person, that's only what you can see at that time. Though there are many features in the dusty world and the world beyond conditions, you see and understand only what your eye of practice can reach.

[32:06]

In order to learn the nature of the myriad things, you must know that although they may look round or square, the other features of oceans and mountains and people are infinite in variety. Whole worlds are there. Inside each one of us we know there's a whole world. Sometimes we forget that inside of every other person is a whole world too. It is so not only around you but also directly beneath your feet or in a drop of water. We don't know what we don't know. We can't. But we can know that we don't know. We can know that there's always more that we don't know. When Dharma fills your body and mind, you understand that something is missing. I can't see everything.

[33:09]

I can't know everything. There's a lot that I'm unaware of. Can we bring a mind of curiosity and openness and kindness? In order to do that we need to find a way to be comfortable with discomfort. To be okay enough with whatever feelings are arising in us to engage with other people when it's difficult So elsewhere in the Genjo Koan it says, here is the place, here the way unfolds. So even in the midst of discomfort, difference, separation, embarrassment, shame, alienation, whatever it is, rage, fear, all of it, here is the place, here the way unfolds.

[34:23]

It's not somewhere else. Practice as possible no matter what's happening in that moment. We can practice with that. We can meet that. There is nothing outside of Buddha nature. Can we include this painful feeling in this moment? So we practice over and over again as part of our training to turn toward the unwanted, to turn toward what is difficult. People often ask about monastic training, why do we have to do this and this? And in some way, a lot of it is about, it's not like, try to make it difficult. But so much of our training is, can we be present with what we don't want? Can we choose the unwanted? Can we eat the thing that we don't like?

[35:28]

not because we should, not because it's good for us in some, you know, eat your peas when you're a kid kind of way, but because being able to find space for what we don't like, don't want, are uncomfortable with, gives us freedom. That's why. It's not good for us in any other way, except that then we don't have to react to anything. we can be fearless. Ed was talking yesterday about generosity and giving and said that the greatest gift that a monk can give is the gift of fearlessness. And that fearlessness starts with fearlessness about our own experience. Can we stay present for whatever is arising within us? Can we include all the parts of ourselves, the angry ones and the sad ones, the totally freaked out ones, the overwhelmed ones?

[36:40]

Can we have compassion for all those parts of ourselves? Can we include them? When we can include all parts of ourselves with some, minimal, it's just even a turning toward compassion, kindness, equanimity, even the wish that we could meet the unwelcome parts of ourself with some warmth, some welcoming. Even the wish for that is a turning toward and we can keep turning toward. And we build the capacity to practice in this way. The sentient beings of our own minds are limitless and we vow to save them all. It's Hway Nung's first vow of practice.

[37:44]

The sentient beings of our own minds are limitless and we vow to save them all. When there is nothing other, there is no fear. And other does not mean the same. Same in the sense of absolute maybe, but not, you know, like this is the harmony of difference and equality. Can we be different and not other based on difference? Can we not push away? So that is my wish for all of us. Are there any questions? Tim. Thanks, Linda. This is just really, really important work, what Zen Center's doing.

[38:54]

And I'm really glad that it's happening. And I'm also worried. Because we talk about these things all the time. We talk about compassion all the time. And it's a very important and, I think, genuine focus of our practice. And yet, we still have the conflicts that we do. Many of which, you know, some people know that Steve, Stuckey went to Green Gulch and started to do a series of trainings and work around conflict there. And one of his students, you know, said to me that it just, it was too little, too late.

[39:57]

That there was too much entrenchment. And this... can't be the case. That was a while ago, and things are different now, hopefully. But I just, I notice as you talk about these things, which as you know, I agree with you on so many of them, that you didn't use two terms that have been very helpful to me in understanding my own behavior around conflict. One of them is conflict aversion. You talked about it a little bit, But as a term and a concept in explaining a set of behaviors that I have had, I'm scared of conflict. I don't like it. That's why I became a Buddhist. I don't want conflict. I want peace. And anything that gets near to conflict, I'm going to run away from. That's how I was. learn to be with it a little bit more now.

[41:00]

But it was only by having that term, conflict aversion, that I was able to see these different characteristics of this phenomenon of what was happening. And the other term is a spiritual bypass, which was very important to me in explaining part of why it is that I'm conflict averse, is that there's deep untended wounds that cannot be tended properly by learning sutras, by even studying the Dharma, that I need other help with looking at those very deep wounds, because this is why it is I can't resolve conflicts, why I run from them. So could you just maybe say, I know you're familiar with both of those, and I'm sure there's a very good reason why you didn't use them. I wasn't going to include spiritual bypass. I was going to include conflict aversion and avoidance.

[42:05]

I couldn't put everything in. Ed and I will be doing a class together in about 10 days on more of the skills part and more of the specifics of what to do. I was kind of limiting myself to the Dharma part of it for now, but I will certainly speak to that now. And actually, I was going to read this quote, but then your thread goes on, and it went by. Let's see. This was also from the Spirit Rock Air Council statement. says, the intention to attend to and learn from conflict is a clear application of Buddhist practice into our daily lives. Without this intention, practice can too easily be a comfort rather than a deep transformative vehicle for our lives.

[43:09]

So I think that, I think you're really speaking to the danger of in a spiritual community of wanting, you know, it's like the longing for harmony may mean that we're trying to cover things over, avoid. Suzuki Roshi talked about looks like good. You know, we all look okay, and after a while it's gone on so long, and we talk about no fixed ideas either, but I know exactly how you are, so it's useless for me to talk to you. You know? Okay. We can fall into that. My teacher, Sojin Roshi, said, if you hold to fixed ideas about how the other person is, you are also responsible for perpetuating their faults. Because we won't let people change. We know how they are, so we don't open to that.

[44:13]

But, yeah, I'm also... I have also been... Totally conflict avoidant. Not just averse, avoidant. Really good at not getting people mad at me. And because I was really aware of this, I actually went into a forensic mental health of working with mentally ill offenders as a way of, like, I would have to deal with this. So I tend to put myself into difficult situations and then just be like, oh my god, what did I do? But yeah, it's something I've been working on for years because it's very uncomfortable. And I think for many of us at Zen Center, it's really uncomfortable. And it's certainly possible to do a spiritual bypass and make it look all good. I'm getting along with everyone. Nobody's mad at me. And meanwhile, it's like the withdrawal and avoidance on that list of things that were corrosive to couples.

[45:17]

you know we're just not in relationship actually anymore you know there's huge pieces gone missing and I'm not going to take a risk or yeah Lauren I'm going to ask this question and maybe not get to hear the answer which is fine I'm struggling with into this how it does not inherently or inevitably lead to kind of separation you know if somebody has or a group has the ability to make decisions that affect people other than themselves so when we have decision making bodies like a board and like directors and whatever and then we have all these people who have feelings about the topics that come up how it

[46:20]

how we can find interdependence when it feels so us in it. Yes. So could you say the first part again? I get the difficulty, but what was the first part of the question? organizations we have bodies that have decision making power and that their decisions affect people outside of just them and how interdependence and yet this feeling of divisiveness arises where you have the powerful and those that feel powerless yes I think that's something that at Zen Center is really coming up a lot

[47:21]

because we've been recognizing how painful that has been. How people don't feel heard or seen or that their voices matter. That was one of the things that came out of the learning forum a couple of years ago. There was a survey done about how do you feel about decision making at Zen Center. Some people thought it was great, but the overall was kind of neutral to not so great. Neutral I would take to mean as sometimes it's good and sometimes it's pretty bad. So that was not a vote of confidence. You know, like, okay, we're really in harmony in doing things well, so this is very much up. We're actually working with someone right now to help us figure out how to do this. We have, you know... You know, Zen Center is this... You know, we roll forward from day to day, right?

[48:24]

We're doing things that's always in motion. And then how do we stop and say, what are we doing? How can we do this differently? How can we have more transparency, more inclusivity? I think there's, you know, some of the immediate things are including residence reps in different ways. But... I think there's a sense that it needs to go much deeper than that and we're exploring what could that look like? And I guess I wonder, does there have to, in order to come to some sort of agreement or understanding on any issue, whether it's the environment or gender or race relations or whatever, does there have to be inherent... does there have to be some trust that's developed before agreement or understanding can happen. Because I sometimes feel like I hit a wall where I don't trust the leadership.

[49:25]

I don't trust that their motivations are honest. And I can't get past that. I'm new to all this. This is new learning for me and I'm definitely not up on organizational development. I can see pain points and I can see, yes, that's something we need to work with. How? In the immediate term, I don't have a lot of things to say. In the longer term, I think the more we're able to have difficult conversations... everyone with everyone else, the more trust will grow. If the first time that you felt a lack of trust with someone, you felt that there was a container, an environment to talk to that person about it and they were also comfortable enough.

[50:35]

It's not comfy when someone comes and talks to you and says, that thing you did, I've just lost my trust in you. That's hard. My face always gets hot when that happens. You know, I breathe, breathe. Can I stay still? Can I listen? Can I actually hear what the person's saying? So it just has to be good enough. If both people can intend to stay together and hear each other and hear the impact, you know, and then what needs to happen, then I think it builds. So I don't know overnight. But that would be my... my long-term sense. Can we all do this? Can we all mutually support each other, whatever position we're in? Because, of course, you're Fukutan, so you're also in a leadership position. So it's not... It's us. How do we see it as us doing all of this together? Yeah.

[51:40]

Annie. I was wondering... Thank you very much... And I was wondering if you could elaborate more on the element of timing in writing speech, like what it means for appropriate timing. Because I've been reflecting on the past couple of years in my life where a lot of important, you know, a major relationship of mine ended and both me and that person are, you know, trying to build together. There's just been, you know, family relationships and relationships, you know, there's been, it's been a couple years of, like, conflict in new ways that I haven't dealt with before. And a pattern that I noticed with me is that I really believe I can fix it. And I really appreciated what you said about intentions, because I find, I sort of, like, check out my intentions, and if I, and then I've been reflecting on it.

[52:41]

needed was space and I was and it feels like I demanded reconciliation or I demanded peace and what they needed was me not there so the question of timing is I'm looking for wisdom around timing and speech and conflict resolution because my instinct is always we can do it now. You know? And it's like, no. Not often. Or not always, or something. I'm curious what timing. In both the approach for difficult conversations and for restorative justice, they both suggest that you don't just jump into the conversation, but first you have a brief discussion about the conversation like I'd like to talk with you about such and such and you invite them and you let them know what it is you want to talk about and how you want to do it in restorative justice that's actually part of the process there's three specific questions and say this is what the form would look like so it's an invitation and they have full freedom to say no thank you

[54:09]

So part of it is agreeing that you're actually going to talk. And maybe what the ground rules are. Like, okay, I can meet to tell you where I am, which is that I need space. But giving someone the heads up is always nice. I mean, we can think of lots of times for... feedback that aren't really the right time you know it's like you're on your way to something or they're thinking about something else and they're not actually open so by by asking someone could we talk about this we could talk now like I'm ready now but we could also talk about another time when would be a time that we could set a time and have a space and not be interrupted and be able to do this in a way that felt good to both of us So that would support whatever happens.

[55:14]

Does that help? Yeah, and I guess a follow-up question I have to that is, do you ever believe that you have to let go of the idea of reconciliation? Or it's, you know, and then what? If it's like, you know, this might not happen for us. This might not, you know? Right. well when you say let go of the idea of reconciliation it sounds like there might be some idea in there about what the outcome would look like so yes we always have to let go of the outcome you know we bring our full energy our full intention we do the best that we can we meet it as fully as we can but we can't know the outcome and there's the outcome in that moment but we actually don't know the long-term outcome either. It might be that letting go in this moment creates the space for a very different outcome somewhere down the road.

[56:22]

So, yeah, and it doesn't always work. It just seems like the best option to start with. Let's try to work it out rather than slamming the door and saying goodbye or dropping bombs or whatever it is, you know? Let's start with this and then we'll see where it goes. You know, it's true. It absolutely takes two people working together. Both people have to be willing. But the willingness of one person goes a huge distance toward opening space for the other person. If you're both defensive or angry or needing things to be a certain way... It shuts the doors for understanding and actually listening. And when people really feel heard and understood, then there's more possibility there. I don't have to defend my experience or my story anymore. I get that you understand where I'm coming from. Okay, I don't have to fight anymore.

[57:26]

Now what? Maybe there's something, maybe it's still no. But at least there's not, you know, just the arguments. I have a question about work practice feedback. Maybe it's more of a direct question. Go ahead. I've heard over and over, living at Tassajara, on different crews, like my crew head or somebody telling me, well, you know, we try to avoid lateral or horizontal feedback. We try to just go to our crew heads. And I've never actually seen that written down anywhere as like a rule. So part of me is like, is that a thing? Or have I just heard that? And then I just want to say, sometimes it seems to me like a great idea, and other times it seems like peer-in-peer interaction is really very useful and important. So sometimes I feel more separate from people when I feel like I have to go through my crew head.

[58:28]

But other times it's like I don't want everybody telling me what to do. I'd rather only hear it from my crew head. So if you could just talk a little bit about when... like an unspoken agreement and when is it right to use lateral feedback and when not something like that that's a great question I wish I had like a cut and dried answer for it generally yes that's the request is we have a limited number of people that give feedback and you as Hedsoku actually made the announcement in regards to Orioki the people who will be giving feedback to the servers and the zendo are the abbot, the abiding teacher, the tanto, the yino and the hetzoku. Everybody else, let happen what happens. So it's this balance between letting people find their own way and not being constantly corrected in one way or another.

[59:29]

And also, my experience has been that often the people who most want to offer corrections are the people who just learned how to do it last week. So it can come off as particularly energetic. Don't do that. It's such an interesting question because I was just reading about Delancey Street, which is a... It's a program in San Francisco. I think there's the woman who runs it, but everyone else is ex-felums. And they have like a moving company and a restaurant and some other businesses. And they only have like two rules. One, you come in and you agree to whatever their agreements are, but the heart of it, and I think they all live together. I think there's a campus and they live together.

[60:33]

And the rule, there's two rules. So the first rule is you're like on a crew and you're responsible for someone. Well, you're on a crew and after a week, like the next person who comes in, you're responsible for them. And after that, like in the first week, people will ask, how are you? How are you doing? What's your experience? After that, they won't ask you, how are you? They'll ask, how's your crew? How's the person you're responsible for? How are they doing? So you're put in a position very quickly to be conscious and aware of others and to support them. And the other piece is every time anyone observes any infraction of their guidelines, you have to say something. Everyone. Whether up, down, sideways. You know, shouldn't be doing this. You know, it's like no secrecy. No hiding, no calling. That is really trippy.

[61:34]

And they're amazingly successful at what they do. So it gave me something to think about. It's like, how is feedback useful? What makes it skillful? Why do we want to give feedback? What's the intention? So that's another one of the areas that we're looking into is how does feedback work? Do you have any thoughts about it? there's like different kinds of feedback too you know like if someone's giving me a rule or an instruction maybe that should only come from my crew head you know but then there's other things like if you think man everybody's being kind of loud right now can I mention can we please quiet down and if you figure out a way of doing that skillfully like are you or should you just be quiet you know so it's just feedback is a huge umbrella And I think it can also be frustrating, like, yeah, if you feel like you are being kept separate in a way.

[62:43]

So, I don't know, I think I generally agree, like, I get really protective, like, when I see other people telling the servers to do things, you know, aside so, like, no, just let them learn, it's okay, you know. But other times I think that community means not avoiding the conflict. And, you know, if we have things that we need to talk to one another about, or great information to share with one another, because that can also be feedback. Like, hey, I see you're cooking the onions that way, but, you know, it would taste really great if you did it like that. I mean, maybe sometimes that's not so bad, you know? Yes. So, I don't know. I think it's difficult to make, like, a really black and white rule about the way that we interact with one another, you know? Definitely. I remember Reb did a practice period here years ago and he talked about feedback a lot and invited feedback and some people invited feedback and I think often he would say, would you like some feedback?

[63:46]

Which of course would be like, oh, so you have some feedback for me and you want to tell me. But it was also a genuine question. So yeah, it's like... What's the skill around it? But I did want to say that if there's something that is affecting you, because like the servers, it's like, can you stand that they're doing the wrong thing? Can you stand it? You know? Okay. But nobody's really going to get hurt here. We're all going to get served. It's okay. They can learn. But if people are getting really loud and you're aware of that, You could just say, I wonder if we could be quiet. Because that's actually your request. I'd like for us all to support this practice together. However you want to frame it, it's meaningful to you. So can we support that? Not as a rule outside, like, just do this.

[64:51]

But the rules are there because whatever the meaning is for you and I'd like to support that. I just maybe I wonder if you could say something more about Emily's question in the context of a spiritual friendship. She said that I thought every time that's been a positive experience for me which is lots of times has been when I felt a sense of sharing, mutual trust, support, and taking refuge in Sambha. So I do think there's a place for people sharing their practice with each other. Yes. Working together to, you know, uphold forms of ceremonies and bring harmony. Yeah, just in terms of a spiritual friendship.

[66:01]

I don't know, it's just... And it sounds like what you're saying is, in a way, sharing your experience of how upholding forms and ceremonies supports practice. You're sharing that value for you, whether it's said that way or not. if ever would I state that explicitly or have someone state that to me explicitly. But when I think about the ways and the times in which it has worked for someone to say, you know, hey, like exactly what Emily was talking about. Why don't you try this? Or how about, well, couldn't the edges this way, you know? Or even, you're really not supposed to be standing there right now, you know? I can receive it if I feel that there's a trust and I'm being supported and it's in the spirit of spiritual friendship.

[67:09]

I think that's such a good point because it speaks to a lot of the mind of the person offering the feedback. You know, is it coming from a place of... or controlling or judging or blaming, trying to make whatever you're doing stop? Or is it coming from a place of, you know, kindness, goodwill, support, you know, beneficial, beneficial speech, you know? So if we can find, you know, I can't think how many times I have not said something because I felt like if I said it, I was going to make something Worse. I can't think of how many times I've said something and made it worse. All my ancient Twisticon, beginning of the speed, more through my speech and mind, I'm now fully about. Maybe one more.

[68:15]

Hilda. Going back to what Lauren was saying. Can you justify the presence of the practice committee, which is an anonymous and confidential forum for senior staff and teachers, yet that forum does not exist for students? Especially in the light of a loss of trust and leadership, shouldn't we have something set up that's a check and balances on abuse of power? I think that would be good. What does that mean? I don't know. I don't know what that would look like. You mean the question or the answer? Both. What I'm hearing is that there's a lack of trust in the practice committee. Feeling like some people have access to that. I mean, it's not anonymous. The people on the practice committee...

[69:16]

like anyone can know who's on the practice committee. But it's anonymous in the way that you can say whatever you want to say and that would be anonymous. Outside of that room. There's confidentiality within the practice committee. And that's something, you know, the balance between confidentiality and transparency is something that we're really looking very deeply into. Um... And we've seen how in an effort to respect people's confidentiality that it has led to a lack of transparency with certain effects that were not what was intended. So that wasn't the intention, but there's the impact. So what does this mean? How can we find a process that respects individuals' confidentiality and... also respects the need for transparency. And there are a number of things being considered as ways to address that.

[70:23]

It challenges things on a really deep, deep level to think about doing things differently. And that'll be scary for some people. That could be scary. And I don't think that's a bad thing. But it will be hard for everyone to learn how to do things differently. But it's so clear, we need to do this work. I also think that anonymity is important. That forum is important. Because people don't always say things. Maybe if you've been here a while, I can go to the Abbey, I have confidence enough that I've been here almost three years that I can go to somebody in leadership. But when somebody is new, they could be too afraid to say anything. So I think giving somebody a form of anonymity is really important. I see what you're saying.

[71:29]

Yes. I agree that having the opportunity for anonymity is very important. And my hope is that we can create structures that are trustworthy enough that people can feel that there won't be negative consequences for speaking their truth and speaking their experience. That would be ideal that people could just talk about what happened for them or what their experience is and that that could be met well enough. It would be like, oh yeah, you can go talk to so-and-so. Yeah, you can sign your name to that. That's okay. But before that happens, yeah, we probably, you know, we did the learning forum. Do you know about that? I think you were here when that happened. Anyway, it was an online survey, very extensive, for kind of rating your experience of Zen Center. And it was all anonymous. And I think people were very honest.

[72:30]

There were lots of written, it was like multiple choice, from strongly agree to strongly disagree. But there were lots of notes and comments on people's individual experience, which was really helpful, and probably people wouldn't have said that in another forum. Thank you all, and I hope to continue this conversation with anyone at any time. Thank you for listening to this podcast offered by the San Francisco Zen Center. Our Dharma talks are offered free of charge, and this is made possible by the donations we receive. Your financial support helps us to continue to offer the Dharma. For more information, visit sfcc.org and click Giving.

[73:19]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_88.27