Lourens Minnema
Moving from Violence to Healing


Context, Experience and Response                

My biographical context has never made me undergo substantial violence. The Netherlands is a peaceful country, the area in Amsterdam where I live is non-violent, my parents never beat me.

I grew up in a protected environment, without suffering, discrimination or unequal opportunities. The violence I am exposed to is neither physical nor psychological nor structural; it is visual violence, violence seen on TV during the news or in documentaries.

If one is a visually sensitive person like I happen to be, watching violence on TV can be an extremely disturbing experience. The most disturbing part of it, for me, is the injustice inherent in it. Injustice in the sense that people are not treated as they should be, as they would be if they were respected. To do someone justice is, in my understanding, the opposite of violating a person's right to flourish, and to use violence against someone often means actively committing injustice. (I do not deny the right of a legitimate state to use force.)                                      

Watching the use of violence as a form of injustice triggers strong emotions in me. These emotions are a mix of indignation, sympathy with the victims, anger against the violent party, feelings of powerlessness, fantasies about revenge, a desire to also use violence, and a wish to militantly join the suffering party in the conflict.                

This mix of strong emotions disturbs me as a person because it turns me into a violent person myself. I happen to have difficulty taking social and psychic disharmony for granted and I happen to have difficulty accepting myself as a violent person. One way of escaping this psychic disharmony and this self-image is by focusing on the object of my indignation and by deciding that I am on the side of the victims, of the just and of the right party. My self-image may be restored by this strategy of mine, but it does not restore my internal balance. The disturbance of my psychic disharmony triggered by social disharmony may even increase if I focus on the object of my indignation because I feel powerless and, worse, because a scene of brute violence threatens the life line to my central nervous system, i.e. to my sense of beauty and goodness in life. I run the risk of losing touch with the very source of my inner happiness and of my `courage to be.' I may start to fantasize about committing suicide if I were the victim involved. My aggression against the aggressor tends to turn into a depression, destroying my inner world instead of my outer world.

Criteria

Having become violent myself, against myself, the outer violence has spilled over and contaminated its observer. How do I keep the damage limited? Which cleansing ritual is to be recommended? Is a breakthrough possible? Having become violent myself, what use is the distinction between the violent offender and the violent victim? How can I be so sure that I am the victim (since I identify with the victim) if I am also violent in my response and easily,start on fire? How can I be so sure that I could not be a violent aggressor myself? Suppose I could, wouldn't that supposition trigger, if only for the duration of a split second, the hypothetical thought that maybe my criteria for distinguishing between right and wrong, between good and evil are only convincing if my framework of reference excludes beforehand the voice of outsiders, in this case the voice of the aggressor?

Christians have a story in their tradition (Acts, Chapter 9) about a man called Saul who is eager to persecute Christians. On his mission from Jerusalem to Damascus, suddenly, in a split second, it occurs to him that he cannot know for sure whether he is fighting on the right side of the borderline between good and evil. Doubt about his criteria, about his convictions, about his self-righteous self-image penetrate his mind. He loses sight of his clear-cut views. It feels like having gone blind. In the story, the experience is presented as a miracle from heaven, and as a conversion to Christ and Christianity. Indeed, it is definitely a miracle if someone who usually has strong convictions allows doubts about them to enter his mind. It is also a conversion because Saul behaves differently afterwards. He does not just behave differently but he behaves like a different person. This person is known under a different theological label, ‘the new man'.

What does the difference between Saul and Paul consist of? The conversion is one from faith, despair and hate into faith, hope and love. Both Saul and Paul are believers, but their faith is qualified by the vices and virtues that nurture it. That is to say, the crucial difference is not about converting from Judaism to Christianity, although it is partly presented as such in the story. What use is it to convert from one religion to another? The shift is from one set of values or virtues to a different set of values or virtues. These virtues are the real criteria for distinguishing between good and evil.

Healing

If one religion cannot be experienced by a specific person as allowing that person to make the transition from hatred to love, that person should listen to other messages as well. Maybe, they have something worth listening to. In the Christian story, the transition from hatred to love is presented as a miracle from heaven. To some, that may sound like 'waiting for Godot', a way of discrediting the very virtue of hope, and hardly helpful in practical terms either. For them, Buddhism has much to offer in terms of cultivating virtues that can heal our feelings of hatred. Not by turning aggression into depression, or by turning depression into aggression but by cultivating its antidote. We are, after all, dealing with poison spilling over into our hearts and minds, and healing them is no luxury. I don't have a lot of choice if I wish to keep in touch with my sense of beauty and goodness in life, social life in particular. And if this sense of beauty and goodness spills over and contributes something to the mentality of the community at large, the community will not be cured physically but may have a chance of being healed spiritually.

 

Ref.: Journal of the Henry Martyn Institute, Vol. 21, n. 2, July/December 2002, pp. 94-96.