What we
shall do for our advices to be influential on the heart of others?
One of the
branches of social morality is the section that its objective or at least result
is influencing on the others and attracting their confidence. This branch of
social morality, which is actually very extensive and full of mental elegance,
is particularly necessary for the "intellectual leaders" and "missioners".
Otherwise they can never achieve their ideal educational objectives through
their special reformative endeavors, and they may be defeated in their attempts.
It is
frequently observed that virtuous and learned people have spent their life in
seclusion for unfamiliarity with this part of social morality, and neither
people have succeeded to enjoy their thoughts and sciences, nor they have
achieved success in the society worthily.
In contrast,
there are some people with low knowledge who have found positions higher than
their real competence in the society as a result of familiarity with and
observing these principles.
Not paying
attention to these realities causes that sometimes they impute failure in the
social attempts and endeavors to delusive factors such as chance and accidents,
and in fact if we interpret chance as "familiarity with these principles", it
will be closer to the reality.
Anyhow, some
points are noteworthy herein:
1- Since man
has an inseparable relation with the society, he should be aware of the correct
principles for influencing on the others so that he can draw their attention for
cooperation with himself as the final aim of social life.
Most people
are the same in this part and even superior individuals of the society are not
needless of it, and will face with great problems in case of not caring and
observing such principles. But those who have undertaken the leadership of a
small or great society in any way, feel need to this part more sensibly, and
spiritual leaders and religious missioners who should penetrate into the angles
and depth of spirit and soul of people, are more needy to it than the others.
Thus, we
conclude that this part of social morality has completely a public aspect, not a
classical one or special to a certain group.
2- The
important issue, which is remarkable herein, is that if we suppose that the way
of influencing on the thoughts of others is only through familiarity with strong
and undeniable arguments in any subject and or analyzing advantages and
disadvantages of the said affairs, we are strictly wrong. Because whatever the
argument may be strong, it only deals with "conscious" part of man's spirit,
while the major part of spirit is "unconscious" or "semiconscious" stage that
influencing on them is not possible only through argument.(161)
Even the argumentative methods will be often effective adequately if they are
induced considering these principles. On the other hand, the required intimacy
between a leader and individuals is never achieved through satiation of their
intellect and thought. Rather, the leaders should mobilize their affections
towards their own objectives to obtain necessary relation for leadership.
3- Using
discussions for employing the others for our own personal interests and
plundering their powers through penetration into their thought is certainly
condemned as a clear sample of exploitation. But if it is performed for
coordinating powers in the way of a high social objective and or reforming and
educating an individual, it is appreciated as one of the primary conditions of a
proper leadership.
4- First of
all, for influencing the others, awareness and familiarity with the principles
of psychology, psychoanalysis and entry to the angles of man's spirit in
general, and the spirit of the person in question in particular are essential.
Some people having particular talents, are inherently familiar more or less with
these principles, and some others have gradually become familiar with it due to
need and experience. But a lot of people have to learn and apply these
principles as a lesson.
5- It should
not be misunderstood. Only familiarity with the ways of influencing and
penetrating in the others is not sufficient. There are a lot of people who have
sufficient awareness in this respect scientifically, but can not employ them
properly and appropriately. Employing these principles needs adequate exercise
and readiness. That is to say they should be turned into a "moral habit" for
having a satisfactory outcome.
6- It is
well induced from studying biography of great divine prophets, specially Islam's
Prophet S.A. and the Imams of right guidance that they applied most of these
principles for realization of their missionary and educative objectives, and
they were good exemplars for this part of excellent social ethics.
Their
attitude with people was so good that attracted them rapidly towards themselves
and their high instructions. Some desire to assume a miraculous aspect for all
of these affairs, while it is not correct. If we too follow their practice and
procedure in encountering with the others, we can quickly influence on them and
penetrate into the depth of their spirit.
Quran says
about Islam's Prophet S.A.:
(وَ يَقُولُونَ هُوَ اُذُنٌ قُلْ
اُذُنُ خَيْر لَكُمْ)
Saying, "He
is an ear!", Say: "An ear of good for you".(162)
And
somewhere else it says:
(فَبِما رَحْمَة مِنَ اللهِ لِنْتَ
لَهُمْ وَ لَوْ كُنْتَ فَظّاً غَلِيظَ الْقَلْبِ لاَنْفَضُّوا مِنْ حَوْلِكَ).
It was by
some mercy of God that thou wast gentle to them; hadst thou been harsh and hard
of heart, they would have scattered from about thee.(163)
And again it
says:
(لَقَدْ جاءَكُمْ رَسُولٌ مِنْ
اَنْفُسِكُمْ عَزِيزٌ عَلَيْهِ ما عَنِتُّمْ حَرِيصٌ عَلَيْكُمْ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ
رَئُوفٌ رَحِيمٌ).
Now there
has come to you a Messenger from among yourselves; grievous to him is your
suffering; anxious is he over you, gentle to the believers, compassionate.(164)
If God will,
we will later see that being "ear" (credulous), that is respecting the speeches
of others and not expressing mistrust on them unduly, and also showing mildness,
amenity, kindness and sympathy to the others, and assuming their problems as
one's own problems, has a profound effect in influencing on the thoughts of
others.
As we read
in the biography of Prophet S.A.: "He always preceded in saying Salam (hello),
and if someone detained him for a work, he waited until he was given up, and
when someone shook hands with him, he did not leave him until the other party
took action for disparting, he called even the children with their nicknames
(the best names with Arabs), and he never sat among his companions so that he
would have an excellence over the others ..."(165)
The effect
of each of these moral affairs in impressing upon the others will be clarified
in the next discussions.
7- It goes
without saying that in this discussion, like all social and objective
discussions, one shall never utilize improper means and ways for achieving to
the goal that is influencing on the others. Therefore, only the way which is
correct by itself, and also utilized for achievement to a correct purpose should
be presented.
Shall we be
fact seeking or aggressive?
Why we do not succeed in our discussions:
We have
frequently found following affairs when discussing with the others:
1- We have
seen many times that after hours of talks, we have failed to achieve any success
in the progress of negotiations, while we believe that the matter is completely
clear and acceptable, but the other party refrains to accept it.
2- It is
often seen that the other party has become more firm and bigoted in his belief
after long discussions.
3- It is
mostly seen that after a long discussion, we do not feel any more the previous
sincerity and purity in our heart towards the other party and feel an
unreasonable hatred and spite towards him!
4- The
history of religious discussions, quarrels and political doctrines shows that
abundant powers used for proving a belief or a doctrine as well as the numerous
books prepared with a plenty of difficulties and costs have not been so useful.
5- It is
often observed that scientific negotiations which are started in an earnest
setting, have been led to quarrels and sometimes grappling and or mayhem of
individuals, while apparently there is no relation between "mayhem" and
"scientific discussion" and never one of them could be proved by the other.
6- We have
repeatedly seen that the other party has no reply against our strong logic and
has become silent. However, he has not accepted the matter and does not submit
to it and or hate it!
These are
the realities that most of those who are engaged in scientific, social,
political and such like discussions, have more or less experienced in the
experiments and events of life and are very noteworthy.
Why it is
so? Because these discussions are not made with the purpose of fact seeking.
Rather, they have been made for dominance and victory over the adversary, and
there is a big difference between them, although they are apparently the same.
The purpose
of investigation and fact seeking is granting to someone what he lacks, without
excluding him from anything, that is to say teaching him, without ruining his
personality. But, the purpose of seemingly logical disputes and quarrels is
depriving the other party from honor, pride and personality and hurting his
affections against training what in his view or actually may not be so important
and interesting.
Therefore,
it is not surprising if he resists against it and hates it. So the psychologists
say:
1- It is
possible to suppress someone through dispute and quarrel, but we will never
acquire his sincere approval.
2- It is
impossible to convince an ignorant with the power of logic and quarrel.
3- The best
means for victory in discussion is avoiding it. Basically, the discussions,
which are changed into struggle, offence or defense and in other words,
"controversy", less happen to leave a considerable effect in attracting inward
approval of individuals, and resistance of the other party indicates that he
assumes his dignity and status in danger. Otherwise, negative resistance for
teaching a matter to someone is senseless.
The
discussions which agitate the other party and cause him to resist, may have been
performed in one of the following ways:
1- The
discussions mixed with humiliation of the other party or his beliefs, for
instance when it is said your opinion is not logical at all; it is not wisely;
no one agrees with it; this utterance is not expected or is strange to be
expressed by you!
2- The
discussions which are made in presence of a third person and the other party
does not like to be defeated in his presence (most people are so).
3- When the
discussion is made in a teaching mode, while the other party is not considered
as his student, and or at least he does not accept this status for himself.
4- The
discussion in which victory is the sign of excellence and priority of the
speaker and ruins the "excellence seeking" spirit of the other party.
5- The
discussion, the purpose of which is proscription of some deeds of the other
party or one of his relatives and friends and or his beloved persons in the past
or present.
6- The
discussion which has become the substructure of his thoughts as a result of
suggestion of surroundings or parents and such like.
In all of
above cases, ordinary controversial methods should not be used for influencing
on the mind and spirit of the other party. Rather, the applied methods should be
absolutely apart from dispute.
Factors
effective in influencing on the hearts
1- Seeking excellence in discussion or dispute and fussing
In the
Islamic instructions, it is highly emphasized on the manner of discussion with
people, specially with ignorant and low knowledge people, and the discussions
which do not have any "fact seeking aspect" are prohibited under the title of
"dispute and fussing". Even in some cases, discussion is absolutely forbidden.
Holy Quran
says:
(وَلا تُجادِلُوا اَهْلَ الْكِتابِ
اِلاّ بِالَّتِي هِيَ اَحْسَنُ).
Dispute not
with the People of the Book save in the fairer manner.(166)
And
somewhere else it says:
(وَ جادِلْهُمْ بِالَّتِي هِىَ
اَحْسَنُ).
And dispute
with them in the better way.(167)
In the above
two verses, the discussions lacking "fairer manner" and "better way" are
prohibited. They are the same discussions having a sympathetic aspect and
accompanied with kindness, courtesy, compassion, and do not leave any ill or
negative effect on the other party.
Even in some
cases, God officially instructs His Prophet S.A. to choose silence against the
aggression of opponents, and absolutely avoid the discussions, the end of which
is dispute and obstinacy.
(وَ اِنْ جادَلُوكَ فَقُلِ اللهُ
اَعْلَمُ بِما تَعْمَلُونَ).
And if they
dispute with thee, do thou say, "God knows very well what you are doing."(168)
In the
several traditions, discussion is prohibited through different subtle
interpretations disclosing a series of mental points:
قالَ النَّبِيُّ(صلى الله عليه
وآله): «ذَرُوا الْمِراءَ فَاِنَّهُ لا تُفْهَمُ
حِكْمَتُهُ وَلا تُؤْمَنُ فِتْنَتُهُ».
The Prophet
S.A. said: Avoid dispute because its wisdom is not understood and there is no
security against its sedition.(169)
وَ قالَ(صلى الله عليه وآله):
«لا يَسْتَكْمِلُ عَبْدٌ حَقِيقَةَ الاِْيمانِ حَتّى يَدَعَ الْمِراءَ وَ اِنْ كانَ
مُحِقّاً».
And he said:
No one fulfills the reality of belief, unless he leaves dispute, although he is
right.(170)
قالَ سُلَيْمانُ بْنُ داوُدَ لاِبْنِهِ: «يا بُنَيَّ اِيّاكَ وَ
الْمِراءَ فَاِنَّهُ لَيْسَتْ فِيهِ مَنْفَعَةٌ وَ هُوَ يُهَيِّجُ بَيْنَ
الاِْخْوانِ الْعَداوَةَ».
Solomon, son
of David, told to his son: My son! Avoid dispute because it has no profit and
provokes the fire of enmity among the brothers.(171)
عَنِ النَّبِيِّ(صلى الله عليه
وآله): «ما ضَلَّ قَوْمٌ بَعْدَ هُدىً كانُوا عَلَيْهِ
اِلاّ اُوتُوا الْجَدَلَ».
Prophet S.A.
said: no nation strays after guidance, save it engages in dispute.(172)
عَنْ اَمِيرِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ(عليه
السلام): «يا كُمَيْلُ! اِيّاكَ وَ الْمِراءَ فَاِنَّكَ
تُغْرِي بِنَفْسِكَ السُّفَهاءَ اِذا فَعَلْتَ وَ تُفْسِدُ الاِْخاءَ».
Commander of
the Believers (Imam Ali) A.S. said: O Komeil! Avoid fussing because in this way
you impassion the ignorant against yourself, and destroy brotherhood.(173)
The ill
effects of discussions mixed with dispute and aggression are precisely studied
in the above traditions and it is inferred from them that:
1- Dispute
in discussion is useless, and it has no result (because hurting affections of
the other party causes him to resist).
2- Dispute
is not compatible with belief (because it is the sign of arrogance and seeking
excellence, and arrogance is never compatible with belief, the sense of which is
submission and surrender to the truth).
3- Dispute
results in sedition and attracting enmity and hostility (because everyone is
sensitive and strict for ruining of his personality).
4- Dispute
causes misguide (because it excites the sense of obstinacy, selfishness, and
prejudice and thereby covers the visage of truth).
5- If
dispute is made with the ignorant, it encourages them to violate the reverence
of one's personality and makes them insolent to him (because when they find
their reputation in risk, they will ignore the reverence, which they observed
before the learned in normal conditions).
For
salvation from such great dangers, Islam instructs to avoid discussions and
talks having an aggressive, hostile and eristic aspect, and even do not apply
this way for proving the truth.
2- Stopping selfishness
One, who
wants to influence on the spirit and thoughts of others, should never insist
them to accept the realities as "an idea belonging to him". Rather, in contrary,
he shall try to express the realities absolutely and even as the idea of the
other party. Pay attention!
As we know
everybody loves his ideas like his physical children, and the reason for love
and interest in both cases is the same. His ideas are considered as a part of
him just like his children, and loving them forms a beam of self-love, which is
the most rooted man's instinct. And in contrast, the thoughts of others are
strange to man like the others' children, and naturally fail to attract his
interest, and even sometimes they provoke his competition sense.
Therefore,
accepting the realities the way of attainment to which is through the man's own
mind, is much easier and favorable for him. Because in such cases "intellect"
and "affection" are situated in one direction and in contrary, if they are
entered to his soul as a strange thing, a contradiction and struggle occurs
between his "intellect" and "affection", the result of which in the most
individuals is victory of affection. Intellect tends to accept it as it is true,
but affection finds it strange and belonging to someone else, and refrains
accepting it.
It is noteworthy that if our real purpose is fact seeking and not personal victory in
the discussion, it is better to pretend that the idea or its completion belongs
to the other party not to us. If our aim is acceptance of an idea, why we shall
insist on it being accepted as "our own idea".
Several trials being performed on the individuals have exactly proved that applying this
method for penetration into the thoughts of others has been successful.
Basically, for achievement to this goal following principles should be observed:
1- It should be tried to say a part of the matter, and the other party shall perceive the
rest of it with guidance of the speaker. In fact, the speaker should play the
role of a mental leader for manifestation of innate talents of the other party,
not the role of an independent being.
2- It should be tried to propound the matters as discussions under study through mentioning
questions and queries, and the other party should make the final reply as the
final decision.
3- It should
be strictly avoided to attribute matters to oneself, particularly with the
phrases like "no one has mentioned this before me", and such like.
4- If there
are clarifications or references in the utterances of the other party in respect
to the matter in question, it should be explicitly remarked and mentioned as a
proof. Even if it exists in the utterance of those being respected and loved by
the other party, like his father, master, family, or intimate friend, it should
be remarked.
Holy Quran,
which is a superior symbol of influential and effective speech and its influence
on people's thought has been so wonderful that some have called it as a "magic",
often applies this method in its arguments before the adversaries and self
deluded persons in the phrases like:
Is there a
god with God?(174)
(مَنْ اِلهٌ غَيْرُ اللهِ)
What god
other than God?(175)
(هَلْ مِنْ خالِق غَيْرُ اللهِ)
Is there any
creator, apart from God?(176)
And also the
phrases such as:
(اَفَلَمْ يَسِيرُوا فِي الاَْرْضِ
فَتَكُونَ لَهُمْ قُلُوبٌ يَعْقِلُونَ بِها).
What, have
they not journeyed in the land so that they have hearts to understand with or
ears to hear with?(177)
It
stipulates different issues and leaves final judgement on the burden of the
hearers and seeks help from their own conscience in solving the issues.
3- Provoking positive affections
As it was
also referred to in the previous discussion, one shall always try to avoid
confliction of intellect and affections in two opposite parts. Rather, he shall
attempt to orient the affections in the same direction of intellect for
supporting intellect's attraction power just like the power of moon in low and
high tide, which is sometimes supported by sun's gravitation for being in the
same direction, and for attainment to this purpose, following methods should be
applied in a bid to provoke affections.
1- Name of
everybody is the most favorable word and most harmonic song for him. So one
shall call him respectfully with his name for provoking his affections, and if
he has several names, the most interested and respectful name should be
selected. We have read in the traditions a man should be called with his
"nickname"(178). (Nickname is the most respectful
name with Arabs).
It is also
narrated in respect to tempers of Prophet S.A. that he called everybody with his
best name and even selected an appropriate nickname for those lacking any
nickname.
2- First, an
opportunity should be granted to the others for saying their utterances, and one
shall carefully listen to what they say. This shows that one is really seeking
for the fact, and moreover, he is also sympathetic and assumes respect and
reputation for the other party. Each of these aspects has an effective share in
provoking one's positive affections.
On other
hand, naturally everyone focuses all of his power in expression of his idea and
arguments, and only intends to divulge what is in his mind, and surely in this
condition, he does not have any readiness for acceptance of others. So,
expressing our own matters and arguments before his complete evacuation is just
like seeding in a thorny and brushy land.
It often
happens that individuals have some complexes, which are opened, through
expressing them, and then they are changed to normal individuals for hearing the
truth. We read about Prophet S.A. and leaders of right guidance A.S. that they
granted an opportunity to the other parties for speaking.
3-
Expressing desire to what the other party likes, and speaking about those who
have a significant share in provoking the individual's affections. We read about
Prophet S.A. that sometimes when he was alone with some of his companions, he
asked them about their family concerns and wife and children and whatever they
liked.
4- The
admirable or acceptable parts of utterance of the other party should be remarked
so that his soul will become ready for accepting weak points and mistakes of the
others.
5- Practical
sympathy, in its real sense, is one of the most critical factors in provoking
affections of others and making their mental condition ready for acceptance of
fundamental matters. If they observe a real sympathy from the speaker, they may
accept his arguments even if they are not completely acceptable for them, and
make themselves understood that his comments are correct and any of his
proposals is beneficial for them.
One of the
reasons for wonderful welcome from the speeches of Prophet S.A. was this point
that every body recognized him as his real sympathetic one so that non
acceptance of the right way by some people appeared in the Prophet S.A. as fatal
complexes:
(فَلَعَلَّكَ باخِعٌ نَفْسَكَ عَلى
آثارِهِمْ اِنْ لَمْ يُؤْمِنُوا بِهذَا الْحَدِيثِ اَسَفاً).
Yet
perchance, if they believe not in this tiding, thou wilt consume thyself,
following after them, of grief.(179)
And we read
in respect to the biography of Prophet S.A.:
«وَلا يَأْتِيهِ اَحَدٌ حُرٌّ اَوْ عَبْدٌ اَوْ اَمَةٌ اِلاّ
قامَ مَعَهُ فِي حاجَتِهِ».
Whoever came
to him, either a freeman or slave and bondmaid, he accompanied him (her) and
helped him in his work.(180)
6- The way
of reminding mistakes should be so that if the affections of the other party are
not provoked in the favor of speaker, at least they should not be hurt, and
thereby the mistakes should be minded indirectly as far as possible.
The phrases
like "Don't you think that this is better?", "Isn't it better to do so?", "I
sometimes do so", and such like are all phrases which could be used for
reminding the mistakes indirectly.
7- We shall
never provoke obstinacy sense of someone unduly, and if he insists on a matter
which is not the main issue of discussion or criticizes it, we shall coordinate
ourselves with him correctly in the criticism or supporting and defending it
instead of opposition. This makes the other party disarmed and invites him to
more reflection.
For
instance, if we what to invite someone to Islam, and find that he has a negative
idea about the Moslems and their situation and insists on it, we shall not
defend the situation of Moslems so much. Rather, we too shall coordinate
ourselves with him and mention some basic criticisms (of course, without
exaggeration and indulgence) and then follow our main issue. Certainly, we will
be more successful.
4- Belief in one's own speech
The
well-known phrase, "The utterance coming from the heart, will be accepted
heartily" indicates a precise and subtle mental reality, which could be used in
the ways of influencing on the others as a vital principle.
As we know
tongue and speech is the interpreter of mind and idea and also the scale of
speaker's own belief determines evaluation of speeches.
It is not
surprising that degree of belief of a hearer to an utterance has a close
relation with the degree of belief of the speaker. One may say something
apparently very excellent and good, but when his tone shows that he does not
believe in it so much, it causes the hearer to doubt in the correctness of that
issue. In contrary, if a subject is not very acceptable, but there are the
evidences of his decisive belief in it, this provokes the curiosity and
precision towards it, and makes them optimistic to that speech.
This too is
noteworthy that not believing in a matter could not be totally hidden with
mannered utterances, especially in speech that against most deeds, is full of
delicacies through which spirit of emotions and mind of speaker will be
manifested willingly or not.
Observing
one's own speech is one of the important factors for its influence because it is
possible that the utterance does not indicate the belief, but one's action is
mostly the sign of belief.
5- Effect of virtue of the speaker
It is said:
«لا تَنْظُرْ اِلى مَنْ قالَ، بَلِ انْظُرْ اِلى ما قالَ».
Do not
consider the speaker; rather consider his (her) utterance.
But its full
observance is not possible for anybody, because everybody assumes the speech as
the product of speaker's being. In view of material tools, speech is the same
transformation in man's energies. Chemical energy is transformed into mechanical
energy in the cells and mechanical energy to acoustic energy.
And in view
of spiritual contents and materials, it is the product of thoughts, education,
environment, knowledge, attributes, and spiritual states.
Thus, any
speech has the same color of its speaker, and carries the speaker's attributes,
either his spirituality or his ugly and bad attributes, and on this account,
when an utterance is issued by a virtuous individual, all windows of human
spirit are opened to it, and all existence of man receives it.
And in
contrast, a speech uttered by an impure and evil person faces with the
unconscious negative reaction of the hearer, and the windows of his spirit are
closed to it.