Nonviolent Communication - A Language of Life, Second Edition @Team LiB (11 page)

Empathy is a respectful understanding of what others are experiencing. The Chinese philosopher Chuang-Tzu stated that true empathy requires listening with the whole being: “The hearing that is only in the ears is one thing. The hearing of the understanding is another. But the hearing of the spirit is not limited to any one faculty, to the ear, or to the mind. Hence it demands the emptiness of all the faculties. And when the faculties are empty, then the whole being listens. There is then a direct grasp of what is right there before you that can never be heard with the ear or understood with the mind.”

In relating to others, empathy occurs only when we have successfully shed all preconceived ideas and judgments about them. The Austrian-born Israeli philosopher Martin Buber describes this quality of presence that life demands of us: “In spite of all similarities, every living situation has, like a newborn child, a new face, that has never been before and will never come again. It demands of you a reaction that cannot be prepared beforehand. It demands nothing of what is past. It demands presence, responsibility; it demands you.”

Empathy: emptying the mind and listening with our whole being

The presence that empathy requires is not easy to maintain. “The capacity to give one’s attention to a sufferer is a very rare and difficult thing; it is almost a miracle; it is a miracle,” asserts French writer Simone Weil. “Nearly all those who think they have the capacity do not possess it.” Instead of empathy, we tend instead to have a strong urge to give advice or reassurance and to explain our own position or feeling. Empathy, on the other hand, requires focusing full attention on the other person’s message. We give to others the time and space they need to express themselves fully and to feel understood. There is a Buddhist saying that aptly describes this ability: “Don’t just do something, stand there.”

Ask before offering advice or reassurance.

It is often frustrating for someone needing empathy to have us assume that they want reassurance or “fix-it” advice. I received a lesson from my daughter that taught me to check whether advice or reassurance is wanted before offering any. She was looking in the mirror one day and said, “I’m as ugly as a pig.”

“You’re the most gorgeous creature God ever put on the face of the earth,” I declared. She shot me a look of exasperation, exclaimed “Oh, Daddy!”, and slammed the door as she left the room. I later found out that she was wanting some empathy. Instead of my illtimed reassurance, I could have asked, “Are you feeling disappointed with your appearance today?”

My friend Holley Humphrey identified some common behaviors that prevent us from being sufficiently present to connect empathically with others. The following are examples of such obstacles:

• Advising: “I think you should . . . ” “How come you didn’t . . . ?”
  

• One-upping: “That’s nothing; wait’ll you hear what happened to me.”
  

• Educating: “This could turn into a very positive experience for you if you just . . . ”
  

• Consoling: “It wasn’t your fault; you did the best you could.”
  

• Story-telling: “That reminds me of the time . . . ”
  

• Shutting down: “Cheer up. Don’t feel so bad.”
  

• Sympathizing: “Oh, you poor thing . . . ”
  

• Interrogating: “When did this begin?”
  

• Explaining: “I would have called but . . . ”
  

• Correcting: “That’s not how it happened.”
  

• In his book,
  When Bad Things Happen to Good People
  , Rabbi Harold Kushner describes how painful it was for him, when his son was dying, to hear the words people offered that were intended to make him feel better. Even more painful was his recognition that for twenty years he had been saying the same things to other people in similar situations!
  

  Believing we have to “fix” situations and make others feel better prevents us from being present. Those of us in the role of counselor or psychotherapist are particularly susceptible to this belief. Once, when I was working with twenty-three mental health professionals, I asked them to write, word for word, how they would respond to a client who says, “I’m feeling very depressed. I just don’t see any reason to go on.” I collected the answers they had written down and announced, “I am now going to read out loud what each of you wrote. Imagine yourself in the role of the person who expressed the feeling of depression, and raise your hand after each statement you hear that gives you a sense that you’ve been understood.” Hands were raised to only three of the twenty-three responses. Questions such as, “When did this begin?” constituted the most frequent response; they give the appearance that the professional is obtaining the information necessary to diagnose and then treat the problem. In fact, such intellectual understanding of a problem blocks the kind of presence that empathy requires. When we are thinking about people’s words, listening to how they connect to our theories, we are looking at people—we are not with them. The key ingredient of empathy is presence: we are wholly present with the other party and what they are experiencing. This quality of presence distinguishes empathy from either mental understanding or sympathy. While we may choose at times to sympathize with others by feeling their feelings, it’s helpful to be aware that during the moment we are offering sympathy, we are not empathizing.
  

  Intellectual understanding blocks empathy.