The Limits of Understanding Another
Los Límites de Comprender al Otro
A student notices a stream of interpretive thoughts arising while listening, and questions whether true understanding of another person is possible.
The Limits of Understanding Another
A student notices a stream of interpretive thoughts arising while listening, and questions whether true understanding of another person is possible.
As I was listening to your conversation just now, I noticed a stream of commentary thoughts about what was being talked about. There's no emotional charge to this commentary, but I know there are interpretations. If I engage with it or buy into it, then the capacity of listening weakens. I was trying to swim with it, as you described. The mind just interprets when receiving information. That triggers the mechanism of interpreting. That's what the mind does. My interpretation is not what you were saying, and in a way it doesn't help me to truly hear you.
I think that's true, but there will always be interpretation. It is always interpretation. To know that it is interpretation, and that because of that you cannot fully hear what is being said, that is what allows for true hearing. If you believe you are not interpreting, that you are hearing what is being said and you know what is being said, that is not hearing. There is no real knowingness there, because in reality it is all interpretation.
To know it is interpretation, and that you cannot really know what I am saying, that is clarity. That is enough. Then the hearing and the understanding can happen spontaneously, in another place, without you doing anything. It is not up to you in the way you think of it. No effort is needed. It can just happen.
I notice that true hearing happens more and more when I am not distracted by interpretation. I take a deep breath, clear up, and choose not to go into the interpretation, to stay with the true hearing.
What are you calling true hearing? Just seeing the interpretation is enough, is what I am saying.
I want to truly understand what people are saying, instead of my interpretation of what they are saying.
The desire to understand
That is a good one. The desire to truly understand what somebody is saying: what is that in your experience?
I think it links to past experience. I misunderstand people a lot because of my interpretation, which is highly conditioned.
Let's focus on your direct experience of wanting to understand. You are explaining why it is happening and where it comes from, but I want to focus on the experience itself. You said you really want to understand what somebody is saying, and you are noticing there is interpretation.
In this case, your talk is very important.
I understand that. But you are also talking about other people, what others are saying in conversation, and you want to truly understand. So there is a desire for something, a longing. What is understanding? Consider it a big cloud in the sky: this wanting to understand what I am saying, or what somebody is saying. That is an experience you are having. What is the shape and form and taste of it? There is a desiring, a wanting, perhaps a sense of need.
That is what I don't understand. I don't know what understanding is. This is what I struggle with. I thought I don't really understand you because of my interpretation, but I don't actually have a clear idea of what true understanding of your words would be.
I hear you, and I think it is true. You cannot know what I am saying. I cannot know what you are saying. I can only interpret what you are saying. I cannot know your experience. I can never really know any of that, and nobody can.
So do I give up? Is it the wrong direction?
I am talking about there being a desire to know. I also have a desire to understand you, to know what you are communicating as clearly as possible. But knowing it is all interpretation, I can only interpret.
So there is no such thing as clear understanding.
Two kinds of understanding
It depends on what we mean by understanding. Understanding another person communicating: there is more and more possible clarity, but there is no such thing as absolute clarity.
In a different context, which has to do with understanding the reality of our own experience, there is clarity that can be very total. For example, the understanding that something is a thought and not reality can be total and clear. That is an understanding of my own direct experience. These are different kinds of understanding.
The understanding of what another human being is communicating: total understanding is impossible. It is always an "always coming closer," an always clarifying possibility, with openness to not knowing. The clarity that can be total is the understanding that it is always all interpretation. That is the understanding of my own experience.
That opens the possibility to listen more deeply, to be attentive more deeply, to have more open curiosity, to know that I cannot really know what you are saying at any instant. You can experience this as something scary and difficult, or as something beautiful, because now you are exploring the mystery of relationship, the mystery of another, and of yourself.
This is when it goes slightly deeper than the superficial level of understanding. Just because it has gone slightly deeper, it does carry a bit of fear. But it is an opening, right?
Yes. That is why I was asking what your experience is, whether there is a longing, a desire, because I expected there might also be a little fear.
I think there is, because this path has been very lonely. Especially with this unknown thing, there is no way I can communicate with anyone. So to truly communicate this reality with you here is very strange to me.
The absolute statement
Pause there. You said something that is too absolute. You said, "I cannot communicate with anyone." That is too black and white.
Oh, right.
You can communicate. You are communicating now. Communicating in a way where you and another understand each other perfectly and know each other totally, that is not possible. But it is also a blessing that it is not possible. It is the beauty that it is not possible, because then it is this never-ending exploration of relationship and communication. For one to fully know another totally would reduce the other into something so much less than what we are.
Yes, it is always only my idea of people. It is never the people themselves.
I am suggesting it is not one or the other. It is not about totally knowing the other, and it is not about not being able to know another at all, or not communicating at all. That is not true either. You can swim, metaphorically, in the experience of the dance: loneliness and exploration and communication, longing and understanding and misunderstanding, interpretation and misinterpretation, and everything in between. All of that is a beautiful exploration of yourself and others.
There may be a fear, a sense that there is something you would get if you understood something perfectly.
I have a habit of avoiding mistakes. I take misunderstanding people as a mistake. It is a habit of being avoidant.
That is pretty normal. To see misinterpretation as a mistake is normal. Just look at what you feel you would get, what would change for you, if you understood or communicated totally and perfectly. What do you feel you would get? Maybe that is what you can let go of.
What understanding promises
It could be a relief. I get the point, then there is no struggle. I am listening to you for solving.
For solving?
Yes, for solving. My interpretation is what blocks the true. It is what makes true understanding not possible.
This is what I am hearing then. You have a sense that if you understood me perfectly, what you are struggling with would stop, would end. But because you realize all you can do is interpret, now you have this unsolvable problem. Is that right?