The Growing Edges of Community: Ji Hyang (USA Crossing the Color Line

The Growing Edges of Community: Crossing the Color Line

Ji Hyang Padma, Ph.D. and Gina Harris, M.A.T., M.B.A. Editors note: In this reflection Ji Hyang draws on her three decades of experience as a Buddhist practitioner and educator partnering with Gina whose extensive work in areas of racial justice to reflect on the intersection of injustice and practices that cultivate peace within and without.

The Present Situation

At this time, when the social compact that unites our communities is fraying due to pervasive patterns of domination and oppression expressed through racism and multiple forms of “othering,” the need to shift from a competitive, hierarchical social system to regenerative social systems that mimic nature is more essential than ever. This paradigm shift through development of intercultural literacy and other socialemotional skills is more urgently needed than ever.

As I undertook this action research project over the summer, the news stories flooded in: stories of marginalization and disconnection perpetuated through racism, xenophobia and other forms of bias, as well as instances of micro-aggressions experienced within the course of the work. It is evident that the current socio-political system reflects white supremacy culture and is not sustainable. While, in the past, such incidents were often invisible, the ubiquity of social media has guaranteed that incidents of racism and of other bias will now be publicly displayed. We are collectively experiencing a critical wake-up call through our increasing knowledge of racial bias and racial harm. We need to change both the invisible ideologies and belief systems that underlie these patterns of domination and oppression, and the outward expression of these systems.

The vision

We envision a world of equity, in which hierarchical relationships are not the dominant force. Relationships are formed and operate with a flow of reciprocity. Out of this comes social sustainability, which forms the conditions for true peace. Shifting from an identification with the self as “I,” --an individual which is by definition isolated, anxious, alone and lonely, and oriented toward perception of threat-- to identification with the collective “We,” which is a source of continuous renewal, the social system takes on a regenerative ecosystem awareness. Through this work, we are investing in social capital-helping rebuild living systems by helping people connect to themselves and others in nourishing ways. (Walsh, 2009).

The more beautiful world our hearts know is possible involves community operating at levels of depth, understanding, connectivity and compassion not seen in recent times. This world brings people together without the rigidity of hierarchical mandates, and therefore allows for freedom of not only movement but shared resources. It is a world where each person shares their gifts, skills and talents and in doing so, supports the unfolding of others’ gifts and resources. These mutually enhancing relationships create sustainable commons: spaces where the collective benefits from shared cultural and natural resources, and individuals’ basic needs are met. Equity and inclusion are at the forefront of the goals and aims of the more beautiful world, including inclusion of the needs of our earth, its resources and all the people, plants and animals that inhabit it. It is a world which centers its value coordinates upon the greatest benefit for the whole.

In this way, we can see that our envisioned world is always-emergent, as its cultural-relational system is naturally responsive to the changing needs of its members (Jordan, 2002). Institutions and communities, like forests and all living systems create themselves. They do not exist in some abstract state of perfection. They are continually growing and changing. A part is a manifestation

of the whole rather than just a component of it—a fact known within many indigenous traditions. So—our institutions are a reflection of us, and they are reflected within us (Senge, 2008). We are all in this together, evolving together. The way that our institutions evolve is up to us. The work that each of us does on a personal level to shift the story of separation to a story of interbeing has global implications.

Just as the cells of the body support each other through their diversity, and the diversity of the forest makes the forest culture more resilient, in this same way, our human institutions need diversity in order to be resilient. Leading philosopher Vandana Shiva (2016) described the forest principle as a continuous influence upon societal evolution. Shiva noted that the “diversity, harmony and self-sustaining nature of the forest formed the organizational principles guiding Indian civilization” (Shiva, 2016 p.55-56).

In that same vein, Tagore (as cited in Shiva, 2016) writes

The culture that has arisen from the forest has been influenced by the diverse processes of renewal of life, which are always at play in the forest, varying from species to species, from season to season, in sight and sound and smell. The unifying principle of life in diversity, of democratic pluralism, thus became the principle of Indian civilization. (p.56).

In this vein, we have found here, in the lush, richly diverse forest ecosystems of the Northeast, ongoing inspiration for sociopolitical sustainability which arises out of personal commitments to an “ecology of mind.” As with the discipline of ecology, through which it is now understood that you can’t really throw anything “away,” there is now a greater awareness within many communities of the need for “shadow work.” There is a need to cultivate radical self-acceptance, through which we include and accept those parts of ourselves that are undesirable, and difficult to be with. When we are not able to countenance this honest self-appraisal and encounter with the personal shadow, these parts that we cannot tolerate are projected onto others. On the other hand, when our inner life is accepted as a whole ecosystem, with everything that arises seen as workable, it becomes possible to see this wholeness in the faces of the people around us, in our communities and in this sacred Earth. We sense this as inner peace. This clear vision then brings us to the place of equity and honoring each other—relationships and systems in which individual differences are truly respected and loved—which we experience as justice, and a more peaceful world. Too As Victor Kazanjian, former Executive Director of the United Religions Initiative, notes,

Tolerance asks people to simply not cross lines of difference and avoid violating one another; it leaves people in a state of suspended ignorance where there is no commitment to get to know each other or explore that we live interdependent lives. This view of tolerance limits our understanding of diversity and negatively impacts higher education as well as our larger society. People who stop at tolerance, rather than embracing pluralism, cannot fully appreciate the value of diversity within the human community. (Kazanjian, 2007 p.1).

This personal shadow work gives us the capacity to move beyond tolerance into active engagement with cultural difference, and to work creatively with the conflicts and tensions that are a natural aspect of human interaction and community life. Within this project we have found circle dialogue process to be a particularly valuable method. Circle is an indigenous technology that mirrors the self-regenerating and synergistic living systems of nature. Circle process gives us a safe, equitable space to do this work in community thereby shifting the collective through continual growth and communication. Shadow becomes our collective friend in this space.

Entering the Work

As we enter this work it is with the understanding that everyone benefits from the eradication of patterns of privilege and domination. In addition to the immeasurable pain and suffering these patterns have caused people of color, there is the mark racism leaves upon the soul of the privileged. Bias and discrimination are pervasive miasmas within the collective field of “mainstream” society. Like smog, they prevent white people from seeing clearly, breathing deeply, and making healthy person-to-person connections.

The deeply embedded thought disorders of privilege and racism give rise to an impoverished view of humanity-- ours and others. As Eisenstein notes in his “More Beautiful World,” when we are cut off from community, alienated from our own bodies, and trapped within our tiny separate self, we can do no other than perpetuate patterns of alienation.

On the other hand, (as Ji Hyang notes) when, as white people, we work to recognize and free ourselves from these disordered thought forms, we depart the impoverished Story of Separation and enter into the Story of Interbeing. This, in turn (as Gina notes) creates space for People of Color to begin to break down ideas of separation being held within us of white supremacy culture. We will now detail some of the practices that, in addition to personal work, are essential to the creation of sociopolitical sustainability. We rooted this action research within the model of restorative justice. A widely- adopted definition of restorative justice describes it as “a process whereby all the parties with a stake in a particular offence come together to resolve collectively how to deal with the aftermath of the offence and its implications for the future.” (Braithwaite, 2002 p.11). Restorative justice commonly utilizes various practices such as circle and peer mediation. For our research, we chose to focus on circle as a means for developing community and restoring justice i.e. repairing harm, experienced by all members of the community where racial ideas of separation are in play.

Restorative justice practices emphasize the importance of participatory process, through which the community develops the remedy that will restore justice to the situation. Within our work, we witnessed the vulnerability required for a group to undertake a task as large as eradicating racism within themselves. Also evident was the sheer desire of each participant to “get it right” in creating a better world and owning his or her individual role in the process. Restorative communication facilitates this and bridges the often- difficult and ongoing process of community healing.

Dialogue structures offer safe containers for the negotiation of the inevitable conflicts and tensions that are mediated by restorative justice. Communication that is rooted in honesty and shared agreements is key. Indigenous technologies, such as circle process, create a crucible through which challenging conversations can create the foundations for true understanding. It has been particularly important to have open- ended conversations-- dialogue that is not intended to debate, but simply to deepen understanding. One of the circle agreements we include is to “accept and expect nonclosure”. Knowing that we will not solve all the world’s problems today, we are better able to have patience for the process, and to bring our full attention to the place where we stand today.

Walker (2004), in describing the causes of cultural- relational disconnection, cited the stratified culture which “constrains our capacity for authenticity and undermines our desire for connection” (p.98). The community built around this programming was, per participants’ reports, less stratified and more actively engaging of difference than many other institutional ecosystems they had experienced.

There needs to be a unity of the internal process and external goals: “Who we are and how we relate affect what we create...salvation must come from recovering a direct relationship to what’s alive in front of us” (Eisenstein, 2016 p. 44, 48). Within our circle, participants had the experience of making eye contact, sharing physical presence, listening and speaking from the heart with people who are culturally different. By carrying out Circle as an egalitarian, respectful, relational and embodied dialogue process, we created a touchstone experience for participants that reminded us all of the beloved community we were actively working to bring about.

As Eisenstein notes, “People gravitate towards a set of beliefs resonant with their life experiences. To change the foundation of the “situation” one must give people experience that doesn’t fit the existing story or that resonates with a new one” (226). As we listened to each other’s stories, we had the opportunity to release that single story we may have been holding onto about our life experience, or the person we see as “other”, and to incorporate these new stories into our meaning-making.

Ground rules supported the creation of a hospitable learning environment in which participants felt safe enough to share their stories, to ask genuine questions, and to take genuine risks. We created these ground rules together by consensus. (1) Maintain confidentiality. The personal stories that unfolded in Circle stayed in the room; the learning received from those stories could be shared freely in the community. Through this we were creating “safe space” within which participants could experience vulnerability, and “brave space” within which participants could take genuine risks.

(2) Stay engaged. Listen resiliently. In discussions of race and equity we frequently come up against our low tolerance for discomfort. The invitation is to lean into that discomfort, to stay engaged.

(3) Step up/ step back. For those who are extroverted, especially those who carry some level of privilege in the situation, and find they have a great deal to say, the invitation is to share the airtime, to step back so that everyone’s voice is heard. For those who are less privileged and/or introverted, the invitation is for these people to step up, so that their voice may be heard.

(4) Silence is okay. While the circle welcomes all voices, each participant was free to “pass” within a particular round of sharing, or to “pass for now.” At the end of that cycle, facilitators would again provide the opportunity for these participants to speak.

(5) Speak your personal truth. We agreed that each person would speak from their personal experience, rather than speaking for others. In addition, each person would speak from the heart, speaking with genuineness.

(6) Listen exquisitely from the heart. Listen with a fullness of attention, without an agenda, engaging all of the senses. Rather than listening to prepare our response to another person, we practice simply listening.

(7) Be ready to experience discomfort. We expect there to be moments of discomfort, recognize this is a natural part of the process, and trust our capacity to take care of ourselves Within the work of healing racism, there is actually a predictable range of emotions that surface. The common emotions experienced by people of color with race talk as chronicled by Derald Wing Sue (2015) include anger, resentment, pessimism, hopelessness, frustration and embarrassment.

The common emotions experienced by white people with race talk include defensiveness, fearfulness, anger, inadequacy, confusion, helplessness, guilt and blame (p.11-12). We discuss these with participants, to normalize that discomfort and bring these reactions to the surface, where they can be clearly perceived and then released.

(8) Breathe. When energy is running high, we are invited to pause, wherever we are in the conversation, and just breathe.

(9) Accept and expect non-closure. By acknowledging and accepting that we would not solve all the inequities in the world within the limited time of our gathering we created greater collective patience and tolerance for the imperfect, messy work of making the invisible patterns of bias and inequity visible.

The process and vision certainly did illuminate the old wounds and doubts that are so deeply embedded within our culture. As we educated ourselves about the wounds racism has embedded in our culture and psyches, there were moments when participants experienced overwhelm. We recognized that it is not possible to be “in the work” continuously. There are cycles of engagement, within which we dove deep, followed by cycles of disengagement, in which we surfaced for rest and renewal. Within these cycles, our relational commitments helped keep us focused.

The use of ritual and ceremony created a deeper, more resilient foundation for our work together, in ways that included and transcended circle process. Medical anthropologist Cheryl Mattingly (2004) described six key characteristics of healing rituals:

• There is a heightened attention to the moment, an

‘existential immediacy’ which gives an authority and legitimacy to the activity. • A multiplicity of sensory channels carry the meaning, sight, touch, sound, smell, creating a “fusion of experience.” • Aesthetic, sensuous and extralinguistic qualities of the interaction are accentuated.

• The intensification of experience is socially shared, and it emerges through mutual bodily engagement with others.

• Healing actions are symbolically dense, creating images that refer both backward and forward in time—the patient is located symbolically in history. • Efficacy is linked to potential transformations of the patient and sometimes a larger social community. (p. 76).

Within the Circle process, the first touchstone of its healing ritual is the physical circle of participants who, through their intention and attention, have created a sense of “existential immediacy” within the sacred space of the circle. The second is the talking piece, which is intentionally passed from person to person, traveling the full length of the circle whenever it was called for, warm hand to warm hand, conveying a sense of intimacy. This bodily engagement was key to the creation of the intimate and intensified space we shared with each other.

These ritual foundations were supplemented with an altar. We placed a round cloth in the center of the circle. Participants were invited to place personal objects that held meaning for them upon this altar, as a way of bringing themselves fully into the process. At the center of that altar, we placed a candle, representing the presence of the sacred. Surrounding this, we placed stones and twigs, representing the Ancestors. All of these objects deepened our aesthetic and sensory experience.

We were aware, from the beginning, that this work would require us, as facilitators, to deepen our inner resources. The foundations of bias and racism are largely unconscious, and can be traced over many generations. The resolution of a problem of this depth and magnitude is certainly beyond the capacity of any single person. Therefore, we called upon our collective ancestors (who are already present within the circle, through our DNA) for assistance. This action reinforces another point of connection among the participants: we all have ancestors. All of us, from the beginning of our life, have depended upon the kindness of others-- especially those generations who have gone before us, whose lives made our lives possible. At the same time, the root of these current conflicts lies in the past that is inhabited by these ancestors. Our connection with them may therefore illuminate both the problem and its potential resolution.

On one occasion, when we had reached a plateau in our process, we took an evening to do a fire ceremony for the ancestors. Around the fire, we gave offerings to the ancestors of this land, and to the ancestors of the Middle Passage, acknowledging the harm they had experienced. Those of us who were in positions of privilege in relation to that group of ancestors apologized and asked for forgiveness. We then expressed gratitude for the gift of their presence, through offerings of sage and cornmeal to the fire. Those who were related to that group of ancestors simply expressed gratitude by giving offerings to the fire. This action created a “fusion” of sensory experience, which helped us move past the plateau into new growth.

At the close of the circle series, we had another fire ceremony, using a simple candle. It was time to release the loose ends of our process; to release whatever was done or undone to a higher power. To facilitate this, we offered myrrh incense, which has a millennia- long association with the alchemical process of purification, to the fire. This strengthened the “sensuous and extra-linguistic properties” (Mattingly, p.76) of our shared experience. By utilizing sensory experience, these ritual experiences access the resonance circuitry of the brain, in particular the insula cortex and anterior insula, limbic system, brainstem and the body. This activates the basic mechanisms of emotional resonance within our own body, through which we form healthy relational attachment. Thus, intercultural relationships are being rewritten at the neuronal level. Circle participants also wrote down an intention for how they would carry the work into their individual worlds on a small piece of paper that would be placed into fire ceremony back home to allow the movement of our intention into all the realms of our lives.

We spoke often of the far -reaching nature of this work, which has the potential to reach seven generations back, and to heal seven generations forward. By doing so, we located participants in history, as well as within a “time outside of time”, the sacred time of ritual process- and also interpreted our actions within the context of both personal and societal transformation.

In addition to circle process, we utilized educational content that catalyzed self- reflection in order to deepen the conversation. This gave each participant the opportunity to make contact with a different layer of self, self-in-relation and self-in-culture. This took participants out of a purely intellectual framework, so that reflections on race and equity could be located within their own experience. For white participants, making this often- invisible connection between aspects of race and culture, and their lived experience visible was especially valuable, since white people are not often in conscious contact with this aspect of their social identity. Educational materials included descriptions of implicit bias; candid reflections by people of color; definitions of terms such as microaggression, privilege and intersectionality; delineation of the four dimensions of racism; and material drawn from current events, which provided many salient examples of bias.

Although members engaged in a cycle of sharing, learning and growing together it has been the year- on- year development and expansion of the work within the organization that is beginning to have a wider impact on the community as whole. Having implemented circle process for three years, our recent year culminated in an organization- wide cultural competency training, within which every staff member began the process of uncovering their own bias.

As we know, the shift into the more beautiful world may begin with the individual but it is the collective community and systems of separation that must be broken down for us to see actualization. Person by person, step by step, and system by system we have begun this process in a community that demonstrates a willingness to become that more beautiful world we seek.

As we look ahead to the continued development of this more equitable, socially sustainable and beautiful world we intend to expand this work into more secular spaces where deeper levels of communication on topics of race and equity are needed and possible.

As we have seen in our research, all change begins within an individual and emanates outward. What is also elegantly possible is that these individual awakenings bring forth a new way of engaging in conversations of difference, so that we together see through the core beliefs of separation that block the achievement of mutuality, discarding patterns of deficit thinking. Among those engaged in this work, there is also much need for self- care as we peel back antiquated ideas and expose the raw areas that must be healed.

Our intention is that these restorative justice circles serve not only as crucibles but also safe haven for activists, where those engaged in this work may feel held, nurtured and supported in the process.

As the work expands into various sectors of society, we see this work as having the potential to transform a culture of domination and separation to a culture of peace and equity. ² REFERENCES Braithwaite, J. (2002). Restorative justice and responsive regulation. New York: Oxford University Press. Eisenstein C (2013). The more beautiful world our hearts know is possible. North Atlantic Books, Berkeley. Jordan, J. V. (2002). Learning at the margin: New models of strength. Stone Center, Wellesley Centers for Women, Wellesley College. Kazanjian, V. (2007, August). Beyond Tolerance… An Interview on Religious Pluralism. Spirituality and Education: A National Study of College Students’ Search for Meaning and Purpose, 3, 4, 1. Mattingly, C. (2004). Performance narratives in the clinical world. In B. Hurwitz, T. Greenhalgh, & V. Skultans (Eds.). (2004). Narrative research in health and illness. (pp. 73-94). Malden, MA: BMJ Books. Senge, P. M. (2008). Presence: Human Purpose and the Field of the Future. New York: Crown Business.

Shiva, V. (2016). Staying alive: Women, ecology, and development. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books. Siegel, D. (2010). Mindsight. New York, NY: Bantam. Sue, D. W. (2015). Race talk and the conspiracy of silence: Understanding and facilitating difficult dialogues on race. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Walker, M. (2004). Race, self and society. In Jordan, J. V., Hartling, L. M., & Walker, M. The complexity of connection: Writings from the Stone Centers Jean Baker Miller Training Institute. New York: Guilford Press. Walsh, D.C. (2009). Keynote. Presented at The Contemplative Heart of Higher Education conference, Association for Contemplative Mind in Higher Education, Amherst College, Amherst MA. 24-26 April.

Gina Harris serves as the State Director for the National Education Association. Her expertise developing education professionals on racial justice in education and restorative practices has allowed her to work to empower educators and organizations around the country. As a Restorative Justice practitioner and trainer, Gina utilizes circle processes and communication tools to create environments that break down barriers to communication and encourages open, honest dialogue inside and outside of the classroom.

Ji Hyang Padma has combined an academic career with her vocation as a spiritual teacher. Ji Hyang served as Director of Spirituality & Education as well as Buddhist chaplain at Wellesley College, and as Director of the Comparative Religion and Philosophy Program at the California Institute for Human Science. She is currently the Buddhist chaplain at Tufts University and Buddhist advisor at Northeastern University. Her work as an interfaith leader has given her a passion for interfaith and intercultural dialogue. Ji Hyang holds a doctorate in psychology from Sofia University. Her recent writing has been published in Our Neighbor’s Faith: Stories of Interfaith Encounters and Arts of Contemplative Care: Pioneering Voices in Buddhist Chaplaincy and Pastoral Work. Her first book, Zen Practices for Transformative Times, was published by Quest Books in 2013. Her second book, Field of Blessing: Ritual and consciousness in the work of Buddhist healers, was published in 2021.