Jump to content
Johanne

Profile related MT name for reference

Recommended Posts

Johanne

I started discussing about the profile part of the Michael Teaching with people who are/would be very reluctant to hear about entity, medium, life after death and such "esoteric" teaching. But the profile (role, goal, attitude, mode, monad, etc) is very attractive to them. There are on the market very different kind of "models" or "indicators" to describe personality/characteristics/type (for ex: Myers Briggs type indicators).  How can I call the MT model of essence/personality to attract more people into that part of teaching and without having to go into the esoteric (mediumship) aspects? Gurdjieff, I think was the first one to introduce a (modified) MT system but he is perceived as a charlatan by many.

  • LIKE/LOVE 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ckaricai

It's actually never occurred to me to separate the Michael material into profile parts and not profile parts. I tend to think of it as verifiable and non verifiable. Many of the overleaves are verifiable, and it sounds like you answered your own question: MT Model of Personality Traits (comparable to Myers-Briggs).

  • LIKE/LOVE 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarah

How would you go about using the MT if you didn't believe in the more esoteric aspects? All you could do is guess at your overleaves, and while that may be possible for some people, for others it would be very difficult due to inherent bias. ("My CF can't be Arrogance! I'm such a nice, modest person!")

 

If you're not into the more esoteric stuff, I would wonder why you'd be interested in any part of the teachings... considering their source!

  • LIKE/LOVE 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ckaricai
7 minutes ago, Sarah said:

How would you go about using the MT if you didn't believe in the more esoteric aspects? All you could do is guess at your overleaves, and while that may be possible for some people, for others it would be very difficult due to inherent bias. ("My CF can't be Arrogance! I'm such a nice, modest person!")

 

If you're not into the more esoteric stuff, I would wonder why you'd be interested in any part of the teachings... considering their source!

 

Even if your overleaves are channeled you still have to verify what you get, especially if you get a different set of overleaves from each channel. We always need to verify. A person can of course choose to believe a particular overleaf is wrong or that it can't possibly apply to them and there's nothing wrong with that. If they continue to examine the overleaves they might eventually come to a different conclusion. And even if they don't that doesn't mean they wouldn't learn anything useful from that. As Michael like's to say, it's all just information.

 

FWIW, like a good 60% of it gets filed in the "Hmm. Interesting" parts of my brain. That's the esoteric stuff I'm either neutral or dubious about. It's just kinda there mostly because it's impossible to verify. 

  • LIKE/LOVE 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bobby
2 hours ago, Johanne said:

How can I call the MT model of essence/personality to attract more people into that part of teaching and without having to go into the esoteric (mediumship) aspects? 

 

 

LOL... when I read the quoted line above, my immediate thought went to "this person must be Priest role"  And there, you were!  :)

 

I think it can be perfectly ok to compartmentalize the teaching based upon what you're willing to accept at the beginning.  I know for me, I was turned off initially by the structure: 7 of this, 7 of that, 12 of this, 9 of that.  I had no context so that just seemed like bullshit to me at the time.  I was more interested in the philosophical context of it though and the mediumship aspect was totally acceptable as well.  I think everyone comes from a different place and will initially accept what they're ready to accept and that's ok.  If I would have had to have eaten the whole pie at my very first sitting, I probably would have walked away from the table.  In fact, I did do just that until I found something that I was resonating with.

  • LIKE/LOVE 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DianeHB

Jose Stevens has a system that teaches the overleaves without referring to Michael and channeling too much. There's a free introductory e-book that introduces the system, so you can see if it's useful to you. His books The Personality Puzzle and Transforming Your Dragons are both non-spiritual and refer to Gurjieff as one of the sources only very briefly in the introductions.

  • LIKE/LOVE 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Johanne

Thank you very much for your input Sarah, Ckaricai, Bobby and Diane. I think what Jose Stevens proposed (Personessence system) might help me very much. Even for people who do not believe in reincarnation or esoterism (and reject anything related), it can be a very useful tool in helping to manage relationships with others even without knowing ours or others profil chart.  MT gives me new vocabularies, new ways to understand and analyse my own reactions/understanding/handling of relationships. I don't mind anymore if I am right or wrong as long as the result is constructive. I wish it could be known by more people!

  • LIKE/LOVE 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maxim
On 3/13/2017 at 11:00 AM, Bobby said:

LOL... when I read the quoted line above, my immediate thought went to "this person must be Priest role"  And there, you were!  :)

 

I think it can be perfectly ok to compartmentalize the teaching based upon what you're willing to accept at the beginning.  I know for me, I was turned off initially by the structure: 7 of this, 7 of that, 12 of this, 9 of that.  I had no context so that just seemed like bullshit to me at the time.  I was more interested in the philosophical context of it though and the mediumship aspect was totally acceptable as well.  I think everyone comes from a different place and will initially accept what they're ready to accept and that's ok.  If I would have had to have eaten the whole pie at my very

 

Likewise... it took me a little nibbling on the pie to get into it.

 

I happen to be in a place where there are a lot of old souls and I don't find it hard to discuss the idea of soul age when someone is a bit curious.  However, I haven't found a lot of people who have followed up on the teaching.  It would be nice to share a common language and map of reality.  More importantly this teaching like all teachings of the "perennial philosophy" is about love which isn't tied to any system.

  • LIKE/LOVE 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KurtisM

If I were to teach/share anything here, I'd likely reduce each term to their core, and chip off the more metaphysical aspects that a person could be turned off by.

 

For instance Soul Age is simply a system for understanding your Awareness.

It would be much easier to communicate that to another- how we evolve over life from a mindset of survival, primal urges & self-preservation; into forming group civilisations, order & social structures; and then becoming an individual identity filled with the desire for self-satisfaction and self-accomplishment. 

And then how we question everything dichotomous, develop empathy and actually do the work of loving through all of life's messy dramas; finally seeing the bigger picture/universal context we're all a part of, developing a profoundly inclusive spirituality & learning we do care about living as a part of that whole.

 

You could then easily tweak that system. For instance, communicating with Young Souls would involve letting yourself include them as part of the Old Soul whole first, and then meeting their level by manifesting as a young soul too and allowing them to have/create experiences where they can see they can succeed without the other needing to be a loser or resource/reason for losing.

You can also communicate them their evolution up to that point, and encourage feelings of accomplishment by letting them know their steps, leaps and bounds from survival through order and into the courage of being an individual who wants to make something of themselves, is valuable and contributive.

Or giving them the hard lessons that they may have exploited, dominated and expressed without concern for the other. It's through inculcation that Young Souls learn, they must have direct experience and direct knowing to change course and build empathy- as an Old Soul you can invite them to do/see that.

 

Huh, that paragraph made me think of a funny Old-Young Soul friendship where the Old is highly involved, devoted and compassionate with the Young, while the Young finds themselves always learning, growing and succeeding through meaningful/fun times with the Old.

Seems like a dynamic duo.

 

  • LIKE/LOVE 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×