Some of us are left bored, confused, or frustrated by group dialogue. Others seek dialogue as spiritual enlightenment or as a fulfilling haven for psychological stimulation. Krishnamurti and Bohm seemed to regard dialogue as significant in the whole field of self-knowledge. So what might be the culture of dialogue today, and is it still meaningful? What does group dialogue look like since Krishnamurti’s absence? Is dialogue an environment that can foster real questioning, or does it incubate and reinforce existing conditioning?
Culture by its very nature usually hides a collective mental programming shaping thoughts, perceptions, and behaviours without our explicit awareness. By extension, in dialogue circles, is there a shared yet unspoken subtext, generating a certain climate and conduct in the group and within ourselves? If so, what underlying manners of mind might possibly be affecting this culture?
As a participant in dialogue, I probably have latent desires about how I want the world, myself, or others to be. Consequently, do I experience disappointment, or am I just unaware of my thwarted expectations? Alternatively, I might be irritated by a fellow participant in the group, yet completely ignorant of myself in the process. Is irritation towards you, actually inattention to irritation within me? Do I give attention to these reactions and expectations forming within, or do I not realise the impact of not giving attention to them? Lack of self-awareness in dialogue may be cultivating a whole cloud of antagonism that I do not see I am creating.
We could say that we are all like ghosts performing a script, written, acted, and conditioned by the history of all humanity. Conditioning by its very nature is not conspicuous. Even when we understand that we are conditioned, it might still be concealing itself from our immediate awareness. In other words, if I sit in a dialogue, without realising the active impact pre-disposed thinking is having on my participation, I will merely showcase conditioning, not expose it. The question is whether dialogue cannot only discuss conditioning, but actually uncover its presence?
Clearly, without realising the significance of these hidden “scriptures” operating within us, dialogue and inquiry will conceal a culture of perpetually unseen projections. A culture that inevitably splits the very atoms of relationship, blowing apart any potential unity or real investigation. The difficulty and the beauty of dialogue might lie in its direct mirroring of our shared human ignorance. Some will see the intrinsic value in looking at that which seeks to remain hidden. Others will always seek beyond and ignore that which is remaining hidden.
If there were a more sustained interest in self-knowledge and the discovery of ourselves – relaxing and listening directly to the assumptions enacting inside each one of us – we wouldn’t need dialogue to be a safe, entertaining, or spiritually rewarding space. We would dare to discover the limitations we share, rather than disengage and be divided by the expectations we hold so dear.
I would not participate in dialogue, fixed in my agenda that desires more for my intrinsically limited self: I would go and give absolutely everything I have to partake in the uncovering of it all.
