I am developing a theory, just a thought really, but I hope to verify it and expand it. It seems to me, from studying cultural musics, such as Indian, Makam & Pythagorean systems, that they all knew that musical pitches had corresponding qualities, such as love, mercy, awe, etc.
Musical intervals can be accurately defined in two ways, either by numbers (string lengths, frequencies, etc.) or, with no less accuracy, by their psychological correspondences, such as feelings and images they necessarily evoke in our minds. There is no sound without meaning, assert Vedantists. In the guise of sounds, it is only the manifested idea that we perceive, and therefore it is logical to conceive a theory of sounds based on ideas represented by the sounds rather than on their numerical values. (Music and the Power of Sound, pg 78 A. Danielou)
If each and every specific nuanced pitch has an exact correspondence, then what is happening during the flow of music in which a stream of pitches are uttered? A whole pallet of colors is spoken and a treasure of ideas lays before the consciousness. Now, take the idea of love, infinite love, mundane love, mystical love, lustful love, brotherly love, maternal love, comic love... And now in the other-hand consider Mercy, lifting a child up from the ground, feeding the hungry, rain on a parched land, the breath within your lungs.... How does these shades of Love and Mercy interact? How do they entwine and interact?
Consider the sound of a single pitch, a drone. Aum of the Yogis, Huu of the Sufis. The sound of the Tambura of the Indians. Now imagine that sound gently passing from this note to one that is higher or lower, in a slow and soft fashion. Does this not evoke what we intuitively feel about the relation between Love & Mercy?
Adab is a term used in Sufism to denote the practice of good manners. I am positing that there is an adab of behavior when it comes to the relation between two or more musical pitches, that there is an etiquette of melody & harmony. Not a theory or a mathematical system, but function of decorum of what is necessary and what is unnecessary based off of the local effects of vibrations within the environment as well as what is present in the human psyche. How does a mother decide to punish a child and console her? I am thinking it is similar when a jazz musician is improvising and is making choices of melody and effect.
The issue of music in Islam is one of permission ~ is it permitted? This has been discussed by a great many scholars and non scholars with great divisiveness, and at this time in space, given the condition of Islam being slightly in a repressive state, one will generally hear that music is frowned upon, not forbidden - but not encouraged. Depending on whom one talks to, of course.
Now, Abu Hamid al Ghazali (450-1058 AH/505-1111 AD), was one of the big shaykhs in sufism, and among other things, he was credited for showing that the science of sufism was in accordance with the Quran & the Sunna, ie; it isn't "bida" or a heretical innovation. His big gigantic book, which some claim its importance after the Quran and Hadith, is the Ihya' 'ulum al-Din or Revival of Religious Sciences. It covers a lot of things, worship, faith (Iman), etiquettes (Adab), education of the spirit, ect... In the Second Volume, Book XVIII: On Music and Singing it he also addresses the issues of music and ecstasy, and its permissibility.
Ghazali addresses music in a classically islamic manner, using three ways to determine whether or not it is allowed. First, what does the Quran and Sunna say? This is known as 'nass'. Second, analogy from fixed laws derived from the Quran and Sunna, this is called 'qiyas'. Third, the concept of intention is applied.
Ghazali brings up this hadith to demonstrate 'nass' or what the Sunna says:
Narrated Aisha: Allah's Apostle (p.b.u.h) came to my house while two girls were singing beside me the songs of Buath (a story about the war between the two tribes of the Ansar, the Khazraj and the Aus, before Islam). The Prophet (p.b.u.h) lay down and turned his face to the other side. Then Abu Bakr came and spoke to me harshly saying, "Musical instruments of Satan near the Prophet (p.b.u.h) ?" Allah's Apostle (p.b.u.h) turned his face towards him and said, "Leave them." When Abu Bakr became inattentive, I signaled to those girls to go out and they left. It was the day of 'Id, and the Black people were playing with shields and spears; so either I requested the Prophet (p.b.u.h) or he asked me whether I would like to see the display. I replied in the affirmative. Then the Prophet (p.b.u.h) made me stand behind him and my cheek was touching his cheek and he was saying, "Carry on! O Bani Arfida," till I got tired. The Prophet (p.b.u.h) asked me, "Are you satisfied (Is that sufficient for you)?" I replied in the affirmative and he told me to leave. " Sahih Bukhari, Book 15
The gist of the argument is that because the Prophet, peace be upon him, didn't explicitly prevent singing in these situations, but allowed it to continue, means that it is permitted.
An example of 'qiyas', from the Quran Surah Luqman, XXXI, ayat 19 "And pursue the right course in your going about and lower your voice; surely the most hateful of voices is braying of the asses." Ghazali comments, "(this indicates) praise of a beautiful voice. Further, were it possible to say that such is permitted only on condition that the recital be of the Quran, then that would involve that listening to the voice of nightingales is forbidden, for they do not recite that Quran." Ihya Second Volume, Book 18, pg 209-210, translated by Duncan Black MacDonald.
One more example of proof of permissibility is case of the Prophet David or Daud. "And in tradition by way of praise to Daud (upon him be peace!) is that he was beautiful of voice in bemoaning himself and in repeating the Psalms to such an extent that mankind and jinn and wild beasts and birds were wont to gather together to hear his voice, and there were wont to be carried out of his place of assembly four hundred corpses or thereabouts on occasions. Further, he said of Abu Musa al Ashari, "Verily, he has been granted a pipe of the pipes of the family of Daud." ibid, pg209.
So, there you go, according to how Al Ghazali defines it, in a nutshell, the Quran doesn't forbid music, but rather suggests that beauty is desirable; Hadith allows it; and previous revelations attest to the permissibility of singing and music. Now, there is left the question of using instruments.
Continuing from the eariler post on Ghazali's take on music, from his Ihya' 'ulum al-Din, this is an outline of the salient points for good behavior for sema'. In Islam this 'good behavior' is known as adab and sufism is said to be all about adab...
- 1) Consider the time, place and company
- 2) Consider the tastes, condition, and capacity of listener(s).
- 3) Attend to the focus of the sema.
- 4) Ikhlas ~ sincerity
- 5) Consensus.
1) Time, place & company:
"The law of good conduct are five. The first is showing regard for time, place. and company. Al Junayd said, 'Hearing has need of three things, and if they are not there, then do not hear; time, place and company.' His meaning is that there is no advantage in being occupied with Hearing on an occasion when food is present, or on occasion of discussion or of prayer, or anything that turns away from emotion of the heart. This is the meaning of showing regard for time; the hearer shows regard for his condition of emptiness as to the heart." (note that Ghazali references here an earlier sufi, Al Junaid, and he does so throughout the Ihya. This tells us that these concepts he is presenting are not simply his own inclinations, but can be found throughout the sufi tariqas in general.)
Adab of the place of "hearing" is also similar in vein, attend to the distractions of the heart. As to company, this get a little more interesting: "... its cause is that, whenever there is present one of a different nature, who dislikes Hearing, externally a devotee, poor in the subtleties of hearts, he is found burdensome to the assembly and the heart is occupied with him. and so, too, when there is present one of this world who magnifies himself, of whom a care must be taken and to whom regard must be shown; or one of the people of Sufism who strains and feigns ecstasy, being hypocritical in ecstasy and in dancing and in tearing of clothes. All these things are disturbing, and it is fitter that the Hearing should be abandoned in the case of the lack of these three conditions."
So it should go without saying that Ghazali probably wouldn't approve of skin heads pogoing during sema... but we will find out that he sees tearing one's clothes in an ecstatic dance for the sake of Allah as OK. I am not sure how he would feel about Rifais stabbing or slamming their heads during zikr...
More importantly we can see how the sufis take (or should take) into consideration the capacities of the different peoples within a group during a musical presentation and note the recognition of varying states of heart ~ whether or not this 'state' is sincere. These states are very fine and difficult to discern, it is not always or even usually by external behavior alone that an 'unacceptable personage' is perceived to be present where one would preclude sema. Frequently, a sufi will feel in his or her heart that the conditions present at that given moment, in that present place, are not right for sema. All that might be needed is for a different day to come about, "Ok! today we can sing and dance..."
Allah is the Most Subtle One, Al Latif and He is Most Patient, As Sabur. Feel this in your heart and you may know, inshallah, what I say.
This case is similar to the concept previously mentioned about paying attention to the company within a sema', except in that case it was the listeners responsibility to notice whom was present and adjust his own behavior accordingly. In this instance, Ghazali is generally referring to whomever is in charge of the sema, i.e.; usually the shaykh. "It is that the Shaykh, whenever beginners (murids) are around, him whom Hearing hurts, ought not to listen in their presence, and if he listens, let him occupy them in some other way. The beginner who is hurt by singing is one of three. The lowest of them in rank is he who does not attain in the Path (tariqa) except to external works, and has no taste for Hearing. So his being occupied with Hearing is his being occupied with what he does not know. Ihya, On Music and Singing, Part III, pg 2.
Surely a person of such a rank must be rough indeed! Yet, who does not know at least one person whom external factors fully occupy their entire day? Does this mean such a one is cut off from progression on the path? Hardly, rather persons of this state would be in risk of being caught up in the sensuousness of the music to such a degree that they could possibly mistake that experience as the goal. Inflation of their auditory imagination. So, in order for them to progress, keep them away from music, or at least busy them with something else...
"The second is he who has taste for Hearing, but in him is a remainder of the fanciful desires (huzuz) and a turning to lusts and fleshy qualities, and he is not yet subdued with such a subduing that there is safety from his wickedness's. " ibid.
For shame! tsk tsk! Let us understand this puritan methodology and not shrink from it like a group of teenagers. Classically speaking it is said in Islam "that Allah has implanted in every man two opposed natures. The first of these counsels only good; and incites to what is fair and seemly, so that nothing that is not pleasing to God is conceived therein: this - is reason, which is guided and led by justice. The second is opposite to the first, in that it advises solely the gratification of the lusts, and leads the way to all that is evil and vicious: this is the nafs; whose guide and mentor is carnal passion. God says, " Verily the nafs commands to evil " (Koran XII 53). Elsewhere Allah refers to reason, calling it the heart, and says, " Verily therein is a reminder to every man possessing a heart or lending an ear to hear, who beareth witness (Koran L 36)."The Ring of the Dove, a Treatise On The Art and Practise of Arab Love. Ibn Hazam, 994-1064. Translated by A.J. Arberry. Who is there that can say they are truly single minded? At the sight of an object for which one has a predilection, how many thoughts pass through one's mind? One? Two? More than that? To deny that one never has had such thoughts that would be considered "unpleasant" if made public is to deny one's one immediate process of self control. Societal constructs (Ibn Hazam's "reason") have generally done a relatively good job in preventing most of us from rabidly rampaging wildly with any random desire in mind. Never mind what occurs on tv, in general most of us really have learned to control our outward behavior and not jump at everything which we might want. (In general). To deny this apparatus exists is to take it for granted.
But, there are still some people whom this safety catch is a little too loose and the ravaging thoughts of their primordial caveman instincts may flit dangerously close to the top of their thoughts. Does this mean they are dangerous? Ha! We all are dangerous, it is more like that their own thoughts and feelings are running a muck within their own selves, merely damaging their own personal experience of life and only sometime others, too. This is whom Ghazali is referring to, keep them away from music for the time being until their progression along the path eases this problem for them .
The third 'beginner' that Ghazali would have us keep away from music is he whom the science of sufism is unfamiliar. This is actually trickier and more interesting than it may sound at first, because "... his perceptions have been opened and the love of God the Most High rules over his heart." Ihya, p.3. So, he is not actually talking about a person who is unfamiliar with religious or mystical experiences, why, there plenty of mystically inclined people around who lack certain knowledge on how they arrived at that state. All of us have the potential to know Truth, but few people posses the scientific knowledge that is involved — sure everybody has bits and pieces, but who realizes that there actually already is a real science devoted to knowing and experiencing Reality? Most people we meet with inclinations towards philosophy or mysticism seem to have their own theories, which is fine, thinking for oneself is an important skill. Unfortunately that isn't usually truly the case, typically people of such nature have really just grazed from a bevy of books a hodgepodge of random ideas, thoughts, and feelings and tend to lack a true knowledge of their own experiences.
"but he is not wise in the external part of science, and does not know the names and qualities of God Most High and what is allowable with regard to Him and what is impossible. Then, whenever the gate of Hearing is opened he applies what is heard to what is allowable and to what is not allowable with regard to God the Most High; so his hurt from such thoughts are as unbelief is greater than his advantage from the Hearing Sahl at Tustari said, 'Every ecstasy to which the Quran and the Sunna do not witness is false." And for such a one as this, Hearing is not good, nor for him whose heart is yet soiled with the love of this world and the love of praise and glory, nor for him who listens for the sake of the pleasure and to find delight in the impression. Then that becomes a custom to him and diverts him from his religious duties and from regard for his heart; and his path is cut off. " Ihya, On Music and Singing, Part III, pg 3.
This is interesting because here Ghazali is referring to a person who, while desirous of an experience of Truth, might unwittingly attribute certain things to Reality that is just not so. Their discernment faculty hasn't been developed enough to the degree where this person is able to know what is a quality of Allah and what is not. It is possible, that one, in the throws of happy agony, may come to believe that Allah is happiness. It is easy to mistake emotional baggage for attributes of Realty, simple because we have a tendency to want Reality to be a certain way. (Life shouldn't be painful, we shouldn't feel loneliness, ect) So, in this way we attribute something to God that is rather our own concept and not based on reality. A shaykh is useful here because, a good shaykh will know what state a person is in and what to prescribe this person to lift them out of that state, God willing. In this case Ghazali would have us keep these also "away' from music. Couldn't it be said that music might be beneficial here? Sure, but discerning between that is another issue all together.
"The third law is that he (the listener) should be attentive to what the speaker says, present in heart, turning aside little, guarding himself from gazing upon the faces of those who are listening and upon what they exhibit of states ecstasy" Ihya, On Music and Singing, Part III, pg 4.
The dis-ease of being unable to keep one's focus on the matter at hand is an affliction that is rampant throughout the modern world; so perhaps these words may seem alien to us today. What is the root of this discontent which causes our attention to wander to and fro, unable to fixate on much of anything for solid periods of time? Why is popular music, media and culture everyday becoming more and more violent? Each new movie is bigger and more explosive than the previous 'big hit'. Why is that?
Saturation.
It is important to understand that human beings are emotional creatures first - an emotion occurs first - then this emotion is interpreted by the intellect. We feel - then think... (See Damasio, A. R. (1999). The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness. New York: Harcourt Brace.) This has amazing repercussions on how we perceive and respond to the outside world.
Each perception, every sight, every sound, taste, and every feeling we 'have' are inextricably bound up with the chemicals which our body produces in order for the appropriate organs of perception to function and receive the corresponding stimuli. Sight is not simply the apprehension of reflected light. Our sight is dependent on a functioning organ, 'the eye', which in turn, is codependent on the chemicals it sends to the brain to process the data it is sending. Equally, our brain produces a whole other set of chemicals in reaction to this received datum - and these chemicals are redistributed throughout the body to the various organs in need of the new data.
The eye receives reflected light from an apple, this data travels along the nerve cells to the brain, which processes it in its various manners, new instructions via chemicals are resent out to the tongue, which salivates, to the stomach which starts to churn, and to the hand which goes into motion - reaching for this new delight. A single perception puts into motion a whole range of actions, in this case, the eye, brain, stomach, tongue, muscles of the hand, arm and fingers. Each one of these organs are tied to there own blend of chemical and or electrical instructions.
While the science is still new, there are studies being done to demonstrate that this process builds whole system of feedback loops within the human organism. "Survival depends on the maintenance, within very narrow limits, of physiologic variables critical to life, leading to a condition known as homeostasis. Homeostasis is achieved by cascading networks of sophisticated feedback / feed forward control systems that operate in accordance with prescribed reference set points." and "... perpetual fight-or-flight reaction cycles in which behavior becomes governed by surges of endocrine hormones (mainly adrenaline) and sympathetic nervous system (noradrenaline) discharges. Constant repetition of adrenaline-driven fight-or-flight responses becomes self sustaining, conditioned responses resulting in system toxicity and dysfunctional adaptations. These adaptations include involuntary avoidance behaviors, diversional escape tactics, self-protective retaliative mannerisms, and a virtually complete shut-down of ‘‘rational’’ cognitive processing. In short, the system is on emotionally driven auto-pilot. These characteristics are typically noted in diagnosing autism, attention deficit hyperactive disorders (ADHD), learning and language delays, strokes and brain injuries, and other clinical conditions." DORITA S. BERGER & DANIEL J. SCHNECK The Use of Music Therapy as a Clinical Intervention for Physiologic Functional Adaptation (bold formatting my own)
What has been taught in sufism for hundreds of years is that the human organism is driven by emotions of fear, hunger and desire, ect and this drive drastically effects — to our detriment — our capacity to effectively know reality. If this process runs unchecked by an intentional development of mindfulness we are at a grave risk to be running from one addiction to another at every single given moment of the day. We can not be truly human if our system is forever stuck on an "emotionally driven auto pilot."
It is in this light that some of such utterances of these sufis could be understood. What Ghazali is explaining here is the specific process of how, through the use of music, to generate an intentional repeatable state of mindfulness. Mindfulness is the weapon or tool for the human organism to use against the "constant repetition of adrenaline-driven fight-or-flight responses (before it) becomes self sustaining."
But, mindfulness requires a focus, what is the focus that Ghazali attends to? What is the focus of any activity of a sufi? The sufi's focus is on God.
"Praise belongs to God, who has consumed the hearts of His chosen in the fire of His love, and has enslaved their thoughts and their souls in longing unto meeting Him and looking upon Him and has fixed their sight and their insight upon considerations of the beauty of His presence until they have become drunken with in breathing of the breeze that tells of union, and their hearts are distraught and confounded with considering the praises of Majesty, and they see not His equal in existence, visible and invisible, and not mindful of anything except Him in the Two Abodes." Ihya, On Music and Singing, Part III, pg 198.
"He (the listener or murid) should be in external rest, still in his extremities, holding himself from coughing or yawning. And he should sit with bent head as he would sit in thought that absorbed his heart...
... Then, if ecstasy overcomes him, and move him without volition, he is excusable in regard to it and not blameworthy. But whenever volition returns to him let him, return to his stillness and to his repose; it is not incumbent on him that he should seek to prolong his ecstasy out of shame, lest it should be said, 'His ecstasy was soon cut short,' ..." Ihya, On Music and Singing, Part III, pg 4
"And it is related on tradition that Moses was telling traditional stories among the Banu Israil, and one of the rent his dress or shirt. And Allah the Most High revealed to Moses, "Say to him, 'Rend for me thy heart and rend not thy dress." Ibid.
"He said, "And you see the hills, you think them firm, but they shall pass away even as the clouds pass away — a work of God Who has made everything perfect." (Quran, Surah XXVII:90) This points to the fact that the heart may be agitated, circling in the invisible world (malakut), and the limbs externally well disciplined and at rest." Ibid, pg 6.
"And al Junayd said, 'Defect of ecstasy does not hurt when there is an abundance of science (tasawwuf ?), and abundance of science is more powerful than abundance of ecstasy.' But if you say , ' Why does such a one as this attend a Sema?' know that some of these abandoned Sema in the perfection of their strength and were won to attend only occasionally in order to assist of the brethren and to cause joy to enter his heart." Ibid. pg7.
I have called Al Ghazali's fourth rule of adab of music, Ikhlas, or Sincerity ~ although that is not exactly how he addresses it. "The fourth law is that he should not rise up or raise his voice in weeping while he is able to restrain himself. Yet if he dance of force weeping, that is allowable whenever he does not intend hypocrisy by it." Ghazali in this section is concerned with two things; the feeling that arises in the heart during listening to music and the physical motions that may occur as result of this; clapping, dancing, crying, ect. Again, this may seem to us in this day and age very funny, why should we have 'rules' about moving to the music, so to speak... What's the big deal? Where is the harm in tapping one's foot, humming along or clapping your hands?
Well, outwardly, nothing is wrong with any of that - if your intention is to have fun and recall memories of youth and happiness, then by all means! enjoy the pleasures of Allah! But, let us recall that in my earlier post I suggested that Ghazali was describing a method which, through the use of music, one could generate an intentional repeatable state of mindfulness, And this mindfulness was the weapon for limiting the effects of a human being continually acting from an "emotionally driven auto pilot".
One of the common practices among some of the various sufi groups is the exercise of watching the motions of one's own heart. Watching the various different feelings, desires and where the actual attention of the heart is directed. Where is the conscience focused? Is there a unacknowledged feeling of guilt each day, or is the heart at rest, calm and satisfied? What are some of the first thoughts one has during the waking hours? Is there a pattern?
"If you pray to God (Imana) for blessing while sitting on a hearth he
anoints you with ashes." Ruanda-Urundi Proverb (Burundi)
Sincerity is frequently referred to as purity. Sincerity implies a single minded purpose in the intention of action. I don't believe that that means that one has only one goal in mind, but that in all the purposes one has in mind by intending to do something, all in accordance with each other and do not conflict in any deep meaningful way.
"Only sincerity and complete recognition of the fact that we are slaves to mechanicalness and its inevitable results can help us to find and destroy buffers with the help of which we deceive ourselves. We can understand what mechanicalness is and all the horror of mechanicalness only when we do something horrible and fully realize that it was mechanicalness in us that made us do it. It is necessary to be very sincere with oneself to be able to see it. If we try to cover it, to find excuses and explanations, we will never realize it. It may hurt dreadfully, but we must bear it and try to understand that only by fully confessing it to ourselves can we avoid repeating it again and again. We can even change results by full and complete understanding and by not trying to hide it." Ouspensky's "In Search of the Miraculous," p. 230
By recognizing that there are multiple levels of sense of purpose within each of our decisions to act, it is only then can we begin to see our own lack of sincerity. How can we listen to music, sing, or dance and then claim we do this for the sake and purpose of knowing God, when we have habitually and unconsciously accustomed ourselves to associating certain movements with violence and other types of animalistic behavior? How many of us dance in a manner that imitates the dance of another person? Why is that? Is it because we lack self confidence in our own sincerity to move as we see fit, so we mimic the movements of others and hereby attain only the intention of imitation and not self knowledge in its truest, deepest sense of the term?
So, this is why I suggest that Ghazali's "fourth law of musical adab" be called sincerity, and not simply "restraining oneself", because ultimately the goal is knowledge of Truth and my view is that it can only be attained through self realization which in turn begins at the very least by being self aware.
"By the Truth I mean purity and sincerity in their highest degree. He who lacks purity and sincerity cannot move others. Therefore he who forces himself to lament, though he may sound sad, will awaken no grief. He who forces himself to be angry, though he may sound fierce, will arouse no awe. And he who forces himself to be affectionate, though he may smile,will create no air of harmony. True sadness need make no sound to awaken grief; true anger need not show itself to arouse awe; true affection need not smile to create harmony. When a man has the Truth within himself, his spirit may move among external things. That is why the Truth is to be prized!" Taoism. Chuang Tzu 31
This is where we have been so far, in my imperfect examination of Al Ghazali's treatise Music & Ecstasy from his Ihya Ulum ad Din, the copy of which I have been drawing from is easily procured from the web and translated by Duncan Black MacDonald, published in the Journal of Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland in 1901. So far I have discussed these rules:
- 1) Consider the time, place and company
- 2) Consider the tastes, condition, and capacity of listener(s).
- 3) Attend to the focus of the sema.
- 4) Ikhlas ~ sincerity
His fifth rule on the adab of music, I termed it in an earlier post; "consensus."
"The fifth law of good breeding is agreement of the people in rising up when one of them rises up in a true ecstasy without hypocrisy and strives; or rises up by choice without exhibiting ecstasy, and the company rises up with him. For there must be agreement because agreement belongs to the laws of comradeship. So, too, if it is the custom of a party to throw off the turban in agreement with him who is in ecstasy whenever his turban falls off, or to pull off garments whenever his garment has fallen off him through tearing, then agreement in these things belongs to good comradeship and social intercourse, since disagreement is churlishness and every people has a usage of its own. We must 'consort with people according to their qualities' - as has come down in the tradition - especially when they are qualities containing good-fellowship and courteous treatment and soothing of the heart with help."
and our salafies should note here what follows:
""And someone may say, 'Lo! that is but an innovation (bida)'; the Companions did not do so." " But everything judged allowable is not derived from the Companions. What is to be guarded against is committing an innovation which abandons a Sunna handed down from one to another; but forbidding a thing is not to be deduced from this."
Some of my favorite qualities of sufism are represented in these quotes; being with others according to their nature; comradeship; courtesies; and awareness of the possibilities of helping. What is suggested runs deeper than the old adage 'when in Rome, do as the Romans do', because it is an inherent recognition that there are sound reasons for following the local customs when doing so may be of service those around. It is not simply a convenience for personal benefit, but an intentional act of respect and of service towards the company present.
How does this rule of thumb help towards the goal of "generating an intentional repeatable state of mindfulness?" Well, it works on a number of levels. On the personal/psychological level it creates an atmosphere for a 'pause' to occur and reoccur, as is often referred to in Gestalt, Buddhist ideas and other forms of meditation. This is possible because we can observe this concept of consensus or agreement in many instances, even in actions that may seem insignificant, for example in phone conversations with others, in serving food, in greeting people, ect. In these cases one's action can be refined down to not reactively doing what YOU always tend to do in a given situation, but proactively thinking of the other person present and preempting what their needs might be and acting accordingly. In this way you act for the sake of another and not yourself. Which is the second level which operating on a consensus basis works.
This second level is the benefit to the society and community that this type of behavior brings with it. A sense of altruism is fostered within people when the majority is working for the sake of others. The point of this aspect is obvious and has been dealt with at great lengths elsewhere by others more capable than I.
Another level that acting within consensus operates, is the physiological area, as I earlier referred to about the conditioned responses and subsequent emotional/chemical addiction that it brings with it. If, for example, one pauses for but the smallest of moments each time before answering the person(s) who knock at your door, and preempting perhaps your usual dislike of disturbances, then it is possible you are re-creating or renewing an 'negative' emotional stimulus into a positive one. This example shows the possibility of how one can readjust the "repetition of adrenaline-driven fight-or-flight responses" into a healthy, fully human response which does not operate solely upon reactions alone.