Yama and NiYama - Practical application - 1

All theory is only as good as its applicability. So, let us see how we can implement the principles of Yama and NiYama. For this part of the blog, I will be reaching into my own experience, hence, some of the tools which I suggest may not apply to you. The objective is to share some experience for you to develop your own solutions which befit your situation and personality.
Ahimsa (non-violence): Ahimsa needs to cover anger, fear and conflict. My suggestions are;

Choose your battle: When we are young we got into multiple activities, often taking relationships for granted in the rush to prove our self-worth. These activities cement our sense of identity but the momentum of youth is often unsustainable as we grow older, mostly because the original need to prove our capabilities cease to be valid – as the emphasis moves from achievement to relationship. Also, the increased load conflicts with new priorities that arise, leading to stress. Hence, it is important to exit from activities which no longer create value or conform to our sense of identity. The slowing down allows us time to recover from any destabilization that may impact us on a day-to-day basis, simultaneously giving us time to build our emotional and spiritual intelligence.

Control: How does one discriminate which activity to engage in and what to leave? Look at whether you are responsible for the outcome and whether you can control it. If you are neither responsible nor have any control over the end result, then its best that you avoid active engagement.

Saying "No": Finally, if you want to get out of an activity which is being thrust on you, say “No”. It’s often hard, but the consequences of not biting the bullet in the beginning can mean getting shot in the end!

Conflict management: Ancient Indian literature recommends 4 escalation phases in any conflict: Sama (negotiation – conducting an adult conversation on the resolution), Dama (inducement or trade off, bargaining, exchange or any form of compromise for a solution), Bheda (influencing – using indirect pressure for affect a solution) and Dhanda (stick – applying punishment as a solution).

I have applied a more mathematical rule to this escalation – Sama (negotiation) should be used in 90% of all conflict resolution situations. Dama (inducement or trade-off) should be used in 90% of the remaining 10% situations or 9% of all solutions. While the measure of success for negotiation is consensus, for inducement – it is compromise, all sides gain and lose a little. Bheda is indirect pressure, influence or splitting of the opposing team and should be used in 90% of the remaining 1% of situations. Finally, Danda is the balance 0.01% choice for resolution management.

Obviously, the escalation in any conflict should be negotiation, followed by inducement, influence and finally stick or punishment. Needless to say, once a stick is used, then the conflict can rapidly spiral out of control and there is no telling how it will end.

Politeness always works: This I learned while watching the cartoon “Barney” with my kids… “Say please and thank you, these are the magic words” and indeed they are, with an ability to reduce temperatures at bring logical discussion back on track. Don’t forget to say “Sorry”, even though it seems to be the hardest word, when appropriate.

Separating the person from the problem: One of the first advices I received on the shop floor was to separate the person from the problem. As a youngster I did not understand this advice fully, but over time, I have found this to be a very good and easy-to-use tool which reduces tension during any transaction. When the identity is not under threat, then the other person is amenable for a rational discussion.
It is also a very important tool when punishments have to be delivered. It allows a personal reach of empathy to the person affected by use of power.
How does one implement this suggestion? Focus on the action – “I think this is a better option” or “this action has the following consequences, hence should be avoided” instead of “how could you do this?” or “what were you thinking when you did this?” or “Are you out of your mind?” It is obvious that I do not view Ahimsa as “turning the other cheek”. The reason is that when you turn the other cheek and the other person doesn’t respect your sacrifice, but slaps that too, the damage to the person’s sense of identity can be debilitating. It requires enormous strength of character to be able to absorb an assault on one’s sense of identity without reacting, either outward into the environment or inward into the self.

I also do not think Ahimsa is non-violence under any circumstances. I define Ahimsa as non-violence which does not damage the sense of identity of any entity we interact with. This includes people, animals, plants and environment and most importantly, our own sense of Identity.