Summer 2018

We are in the final installation of my series about having difficult conversations.

Two weeks ago I shared that this series was inspired by an amazing class I just finished at the Jewish Theological Seminary in partnership with Union Theological Seminary, our ecumenical partners across the street. The class was called Sarah and Hagar’s children and was a text based class on interfaith dialogue taught by three professors, one from each of the Abrahamic traditions. I have many takeaways from that class, the most powerful being that the most effective but difficult way to have an interfaith dialogue is to talk about difference, in particular, what does the other religion do really well and where does my own religion sometimes miss the mark. 

But that is the advanced conversation and as a former athlete who is currently retraining my body to do what it did so naturally before I injured my leg and had to start over, I can appreciate the importance of the beginning stages of training, and how much hard work goes into them.

While my class was on interfaith dialogue in particular, I believe the steps apply to all so-called difficult conversations, whether they be interfaith, intrafaith, or every day relationship building known as conflict.

Step one—recognizing that a conversation is one body to another body.

Step two—developing a practice of learningto cultivate humility to see the flexibility within yourself as well as the paths of others.

Step three—to use difficult conversations as a tool to further both your own curiosity as well as, yes, a relationship with that very person with whom you are conversing.

In this week’s parasha there is a great example for using curiosity and relationship building to diffuse a situation.

George Herbert, 16^th century British poet, said, “If a donkey bray at you, don’t bray at him.” This is 16^th century British poet speak for, if someone acts like a donkey towards you, don’t be a donkey in return. We see in our parasha a donkey following just that advice.

The Moabite king Balak hires the prophet Bilam to curse the Israelites, and he would have gotten away with it too if it wasn’t for that meddling she-ass. While on the way to curse the Jews, Bilam was thwarted 3 times by his donkey who was actually trying to save Bilam from an angel of God standing in Bilam’s path. Every time the donkey turned to walk away from the angel, Bilam hit the donkey.

Then the conversation happened. The donkey says: 

“What have I done to you that you have struck me on these three occasions?”

This is a perfect example of a question from curiosity imbedded in the frustration of a fraught relationship. The donkey could have said, “What the hey!” But instead, she asks for clarity.

Bilam, still in his own anger, attacks: 

“Because you have been capricious with me! If a sword had been in my hand by now I would have killed you!”

The donkey, however, is very bray-ve, and says:

“Am I not the she-ass upon whom you have ridden from your past until this day? Have I ever been accustomed, accustomed to do thus to you?”

Bilam’s response is short but strong:

“No.”

The donkey had yet again, from a well of inner strength, found the treasure store of curiosity within her, as if to say—I see our relation as this way, is this the way you see it? I have always felt like a loyal companion, has this been your perception? 

In doing so, she embraced the difficult situation with open arms as opposed to instigating more conflict. Bilam was immediately diffused. He was able to get to also take a step closer to embrace. 

It was at that moment that God uncovered Bilam’s eyes and he was able to literally see the point of view of the donkey, that is the angel that was standing in his path. They now have mutual understanding, their relationship has been strengthened, and hopefully Bilam will be more curious in the future.

Of course, there is a very neat and fairy tale nature to the diffusion of conflict in this narrative—but the model still is a good one for how to use the tools of curiosity and relationship as a basis for conversation—apart from the physical violence and threat of death on the part of Bilam.

In reality, these are interactions that happen almost daily, now-a-days often on the internet, but also in the physical world, with people we know well and with strangers, and often result in debate rather than dialogue.

A wonderful book on Jewish-Muslim relations called “Sharing the Well” gave a set of guidelines for “Dialogue Rather than Debate” adapted by Yehezkel Landau and Karen Nell Smith for use in the Building Abrahamic Partnerships program at Hartford Seminary.

These guidelines act as a practical how-to, and they also serve as a mantra, keeping one grounded when the conversation could so easily turn to debate:

Listen with a view of wanting to understand, rather than listening with a view of countering what we hear.

Listen for strengths so as to affirm and learn, rather than listening for weaknesses so as to discount and devalue.

Speak for ourselves from our own understanding and experiences, rather than speaking based on our assumptions about others’ positions and motives.

Ask questions to increase understanding, rather than asking questions to trip up or to confuse.

Allow others to complete their communications, rather than interrupting or changing the topic.

Keep our remarks as brief as possible and invite the quieter, less vocal participant into the conversation,rather than letting the stronger voice dominate.

Concentrate on others’ words and feelings, rather than focusing on the next point we want to make.

Accept others’ experiences as real and valid for them, rather than critiquing others’ experiences as distorted or invalid.

Allow the expression of real feelings (in ourselves and in others) for understanding and catharsis, rather than expressing our feelings to manipulate others and deny their feelings are legitimate.

Honor silence, rather than using silence to gain advantage.

Thus ends my three week installation on how to even begin a difficult dialogue, such as an interfaith or intrafaith dialogue. Having, learning about, and teaching about how to embrace difficult conversations is a passion of mine and I hope for more opportunities to learn and grow as a community in that regard. If this is a particular passion of yours, or if you want to try to make it a particular passion, we can set up a time to chat.

Finally:

Q: What did the donkey do when he got cut-off? 

A: “Hee-Haw”nked.