As time passed, the design of these lecture-type lessons increasingly
involved our input, which was subtle at first, but carried with it
ramifications we could not have anticipated. For example, a first-time
attendee introduced himself as Hilding, and as a father of precocious boys
asked Kha- lib for his opinion on corporal punishment in our schools. K ha-
lib replied by asking Hilding to consider the lasting effects of authority
figures inflicting pain on the impressionable, justifiably ignorant,
adolescently rebellious, and physically defenceless, with the permission of
those upon whom their safe existence entirely depended. Hilding
reasonably countered, saying that teachers and parents know that
discipline sometimes needs a literal helping hand, therefore being
impressionable is a plus, punishment by nature shouldn‘t be something
that can be defended against, and ignorance was the issue being addressed.
Kha-lib then asked Hilding why our universities did not attach electrodes
to students‘ genitals, and harm them into their degrees.
At the conclusion of their exchange, which included the negative
impact of using fear as a teaching tool on any living thing, Hilding
sincerely thanked, "whoever you are," with satisfaction.
"You are most welcome. May we explain to the others before you go
your way," Kha-lib said, "so they do not remain distracted?"
"Please do," Hilding replied with surprise, causing us to assume he
had told no one his true objective.
Kha-lib stated that Hilding was adamantly opposed to corporal
punishment. As a new member of the local board of education, he had
come to pick a mystic‘s brain in the hope of better presenting his own
views to policy makers, whose records showed little evidence of thought
beyond projecting influence in their meetings.
Ironically, after this session our free flow exchanges became lumpy
with reluctance, because attendees rightly suspected that Bonnie could
discern their motives. Not all were willing to reveal the ones they were
aware of, and fewer risked discovering the ones they didn‘t realize they
held, especially in an open forum.
This circumstance made it inevitable that a lengthy pause, after K ha-
lib asked a question that we deemed too risky to answer, created an
elephant in the room. When he probed our collective hesitancy, "So that
we do not misconstrue tranquility for understanding," the ease and warmth
of our gatherings began to erode noticeably.
The next clipping of our collective comfort came with specific
lessons in the responsibilities of freedom, two of which were that we
regularly blindly follow other's, and we do not finish what we start.
