Letting Generosity Set the Tone for What Follows

I wonder about the power of generosity to  set the tone of the law, or change it.

Right now, we’re everyone to their corner and then knives out. What if we could be passionately on the sides of clients, causes, justice, but in a different way - not with a classic, take no prisoners approach, but with generosity? And with faith that the choice to do that would be seen as skillful, not weak?
 
In a way generosity seems anathema to our work. In another way it seems like a shift we desperately need. There’s no point in guessing, though. We’ll only know if we try. 

Transcript

Hi everyone, it’s Judi Cohen and this is Wake Up Call 491. Welcome. I’m in London, in Marylebone if you know the neighborhood. We’re here for a few days, then headed down to Southern Africa, where we’ll be on safari for a couple of weeks. 

On the last Wake Up Call, I started to talk about what Sayadaw U Pandita, a great Burmese teacher of this century and the last century, called “the three trainings”: dana, sila, and bhavana, or in English, generosity, ethics, and concentration. In his teaching, which has been aspirational for many Western teachers and students, these three trainings are a direct path to freedom, so I want to explore them here.

Starting with generosity, or dana in the Pali, last time I mentioned my hypothesis that having and acting with true generosity, even if just some of us do that, could create an initial shift and even a sustainable change, in the way we treat others and ourselves; and therefore a real shift in the law. 

The shift I’m thinking about or sitting with, as a possibility, is generosity as an antidote to aggression in adversarial proceedings – aggression that can feel like it’s woven into the fabric of the work, and then which sometimes can permeate collegial relationships and friendships and even family and turn those adversarial, and even when it doesn’t, isn’t necessarily the best way to conduct our work. 

Generosity as an antidote or an alternative to aggression, and the harm it can cause. Which raises the old inquiry, can we be passionate advocates and also do no harm? And is generosity the ticket or at least one of the tickets? 

There are various forms of generosity. All of them are foundational to mindfulness and, as the title to today’s Wake Up Call suggests, all set the tone for what that follows – in the next sentence, the next moment, the next decision, relationship, everything. This probably isn’t news to anyone because all states of mind set the tone for what follows: anger sets the tone for what follows, fear sets the tone, joy, gratitude, and gratitude’s cousin, generosity, all set a tone. 

Generosity that involves giving something away includes three things: giving something of value with our own hands & heart, with respect, and with the idea that it’s a wholesome thing to do and something wholesome will come of it. I was a recipient of this on Mother’s Day: my daughter in law made me and her other mother-in-law each a small, third-of-an-egg-carton, tableau, filled with treasures: a tiny succulent in one hole, two purple flowers in another, a fat caramel in another, and a long, slender chocolate in the last one. This is a daughter-in-law that doesn’t reach out so much, so I felt honored and joyful and grateful, and it was a good example of generosity working its magic.

Generosity can also be about giving faith, respectfully, at an appropriate moment, with a generous heart, and without any static. At the beginning of each semester, and even with programs for lawyers – even in our teacher training – I often hear that all true learning comes from mistakes, and about the intensity of how they’ve almost flayed themselves forward, pushed themselves to the wall, to win whatever successes they’ve won. 

What’s so often missing in these initial self-reports is faith: the faith that exists underneath all the “learning from mistakes” and underneath the drive. So in my journals back to them, and conversations, I talk about their brilliance, their motivation, how much they care – an extraordinary amount, really, because it has to be enough to motivate them embark on the incredibly difficult work of the law. And I say – because it’s true, and easy to say because it’s true, that underneath all of that, is faith: faith in their abilities, and faith in their own basic goodness.  I hope it’s a generous offering and that they receive it that way: as either lifting up the faith I see in them, or as having faith in them and inviting them to borrow it, if it’s harder to see their own faith in themselves. Faith offered in this way, as a reflection or as something that can be borrowed, I feel like is another kind of generosity.  

Generosity, whether giving a thing of value, or giving faith, or something else – more on “something else” next time – can have a powerful effect. It’s a true benefit to those who receive it, and that benefit also rebounds to us. The ancient texts say, “before giving, the mind of the giver is happy; while giving, the mind of the giver is made peaceful; and having given, the mind of the giver is uplifted.” 

The nature of the gift ends up not mattering too much, although the invitation is for those of us with greater means to give freely to those in need, for those of lesser means to give whatever basics they can, and for everyone to give everyone intangible gifts of love, compassion, patience, joy, and other qualities of heart and mind that, frankly, can change a day or even a life. 

Since dana, generosity, is a quality we can cultivate, when we do that, the texts say there is a long-term benefit, too. One who is accomplished in generosity is said, in the end, to “dwell at home with a mind free from the stain of stinginess, freely generous, open-handed, delighting in relinquishment, devoted to charity, delighting in giving and sharing.” Sounds sweet. 

Sweet, and brings me back to the inquiry: what if we lawyers had such a mind, such a heart, such a sweet life, offering and modeling dana, generosity, in our speech and action?   Could we replace aggression, even in an adversary system, with a practice of patiently untangling whatever is tangled? And of listening for understanding to whoever is speaking, is impacted, is harmed? 

And if we could, what would the law look like then?