Non-Dual Thinking for Mediators: Finding the Sacred Middle

Conflict has a way of shrinking our thinking.

When we are anxious and afraid, we can be our worst selves. We may become self-focused and, in some respects, may even go about apprehending, or attempting to apprehend our needs at the expense of others. This may explain why, in so many disputes, parties are calling each other narcissists. In truth, each of us may display narcissistic characteristics, in particular, in high conflict. This does not discount that pathological narcissism exists and that that may be an entirely different story.

Watch a short reel I made on these distinctions here and titled, ‘Can I mediate with a narcissist?’

When people enter conflict, the world quickly divides into opposites: right or wrong, victim or perpetrator, win or lose, truth or lies, success or failure. The more threatened we feel, the more tightly we cling to certainty.

This is dualistic thinking. It seeks clear boundaries, simple answers and decisive victories. While such thinking has its place, it often struggles to resolve the very conflicts it creates.

Litigation is necessarily a function of dualistic thinking and, in an adversarial, accusatorial environment, functions to distil from testimony (each witness’ story), parts that can be relied upon by the court as ‘facts’. Its important that we understand that facts may be parts of the truth that have been filtered through artificially created rules of process and evidence and that the court uses to adjudicate the matter.

Outcomes, on this basis, may be arbitrary. This means that in these processes we can be right and still lose, or we can be wrong and still win.

Mediation invites us into a different way of seeing.

Non-dual thinking does not deny that there are right and wrong actions, nor does it suggest that every perspective is equally valid. Rather, it recognises that human conflict is rarely simple. People can be hurt and still have caused hurt. A person can be legally correct while relationally destructive. Two seemingly opposing truths can exist at the same time.

The mediator's task is not to flatten these complexities into a single narrative but to hold them with patience until new possibilities begin to emerge.

This is what many traditions have described as the sacred middle.

The sacred middle is not a compromise that leaves everyone half satisfied. It is the space where curiosity replaces certainty, where listening becomes more important than defending, and where creative solutions become possible because we are no longer imprisoned by either-or thinking.

Instead of asking, Who is right? the mediator begins to ask, What is true here?

Instead of asking, Who must win? they ask, What would allow everyone to move forward with dignity?

Instead of insisting that reality must fit into one story, the mediator becomes capable of holding many stories at once.

This capacity is one of the mediator's greatest strengths. This is the non-dual mind.

When parties experience someone who can remain calm in the presence of contradiction, they often begin to relax their own rigid positions. The mediator's way of thinking becomes contagious. Certainty softens into curiosity. Positions give way to interests. Blame gives way, however gradually, to understanding.

Non-dual thinking also requires humility. It reminds us that every conflict contains facts we do not yet know, experiences we have not lived, and meanings we have not yet understood. The mediator therefore enters every conversation not as the person with the answers, but as the guardian of a process through which better answers may emerge. In our mediation training, I often urge our mediators to come to the table with the beginners mind. This is the mind most open to do the deep listening to, and learning from, the parties at the table. This does not discount that many mediators we train are vastly learned and experienced professionals from many other disciplines but the mature, emotionally intelligent mediator is skilled enough to assume this inner stance which I have spoken of, taught on and written about extensively in the past, and, continue to do because of its centrality to the role mediators play at the table.

This does not mean abandoning principles or avoiding difficult conversations. On the contrary, the sacred middle often requires us to face complexity with greater courage. It asks us to resist the temptation of easy answers in favour of deeper understanding.

The future of mediation may depend less on mastering techniques and more on cultivating this way of seeing. For when we learn to hold complexity without rushing to judgement, we create the conditions in which transformation becomes possible.

Perhaps the greatest gift a mediator offers is not the settlement itself, but the quiet assurance that conflict need not trap us in either-or thinking.

There is another way.

It begins in the sacred middle. It is the non-dual way of seeing and thinking.

Sheena Jonker

Email: sheena@adr-networksa.co.za (for more information, to share your thoughts or for public speaking engagements.

To find a mediator or join our panel: panel@adr-networksa.co.za

For training information: training@adr-networksa.co.za