Omoiyari & Ubuntu
I’ve been in deep contemplation and conversation recently with a friend, a very old and very precious friend, who doesn’t agree with me on a profoundly contentious topic. This has been a most painful process, with a fifty-year-old friendship on the line and my heart and tongue in a vise to avoid making things worse, while at the same time continuing to stand for what I believe is true and correct. It’s a hard thing not to be tempted to build a case and present evidence, or to poll other friends who do agree with me—not in order to change his mind (which I could not do), but to demonstrate what has brought me to this opinion. Circumstances, culture, even geography contribute to the formation of opinions, but nothing comes close, in the opinion-making realm, to the power of “truths” distributed by news publications and social media. Is it worth breaking up a lifelong bond over an ideological dispute based on reports that come from possibly biased hearsay? Possibly unreliable sources? Does it do any good, in the end, to dig in our heels if it endangers a lifelong relationship? It brings into question the importance of our opinions anyway, since my opinion or yours hardly has any influence on world affairs. But opinions will be had. Another friend of mine has come to this simple wisdom: “People think different things.” Can we tolerate people thinking different things?
I encountered this Japanese concept called Omoiyari, which means something like “the sympathy and empathy for others that leads to thoughtful action.” The key to getting Omoiyari right is being so tuned into another’s needs that you provide for them before they have to ask. That may be called standing in another’s shoes. I think my friend and I are working toward Omoiyari as best we can in a seemingly irremediable conundrum. Things are so polarized these days, so black and white—or maybe really just a big gray jumble—that it makes attempting to stand in another’s shoes arduous and most noble work. It takes humility, diplomacy, bravery, and gentleness—attributes at odds with trying to prove you are right. Are we even capable of such a thing anymore? When the stakes are very high, if we care, we have to try.
The idea of Omoiyari made me think about another culture’s special word for “humanness”: In South Africa and other African countries Ubuntu is part of the culture, even part and parcel of government principles. Ubuntu expresses the interconnectedness of all of us. Ubuntu posits that I Am Because We Are. The philosophy of Ubuntu focuses on the common good, a communal ethos that regards shared responsibility, trust in each other, and interconnectedness as essential to living life as breathing.
If I apply these two cultures’ deeply embodied philosophies to this situation, it may help me and my friend to maneuver our way through this awful storm. With Omoiyari from Japan, standing in my friend’s circumstances, his location, his culture can help me come, if not to agreeing with him, at least to understanding why he believes as he does. With Ubuntu from Africa, remembering I Am Because We Are pulls our starkly differing views on this single, tragic topic to a more proportional relevance. In a world full of strife and disagreement, black-and-white thinking, and intransigence, starting a new year with this softened, more nuanced focus could restore the ideal of peace, love, and understanding to, at least, a reachable accommodation. Going for that.
Happy New Year. Shanti. שָׁלוֹם. Paz. мир. سلام. Omoiyari. Ubuntu. Really.
