Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'phobias'.
Found 2 results
OMW - Jul 2, 2011 - Healing Relationships Channel: Troy Tolley [CocteauBoy announces] so this will have three parts: Introduction/Discussion/Application Michael will talk about the topic; then the floor will open for general questions about the topic; then the focus will move into exercises... So while I bring in Michael, write down (privately) up to three relationships that you feel are in need of healing, so that as Michael walks through all of this info, you have specific examples to work with. Let's get started! Have a great session! [Martha] Can they be dead? [CocteauBoy] (yeah) [MEntity] Hello to each of you. We are here. We suggest taking a cleared moment right now for taking a few deep gentle breaths, allowing your focus to be present with your body, while inviting resonance among all of you, and with us, however that works for you in your imagination. And we will begin on the subject of "healing relationships" now. First, we will define "Relating" as "discovering and/or creating common ground." We will define "relationship" as "an attraction or repulsion that binds or bonds one to another." This means that even in hatred, there is a relationship, and the repulsion is still rooted in a common ground. Often in hatred, the common ground is feared, or is not understood, and this gives rise to the hatred or repulsion. Love and Hate are not opposites; they are both bound in Intimacy. Hate is as intimate as Love, when they are legitimate. Apathy is the "opposite" of both. It could be said, then, that the positive pole of Relationship is Attraction, and the negative pole is Repulsion. Another way to describe it may be Resonance and Dissonance. Dissonance and Repulsion are merely different ways of describing a state of UNRESOLVE. The lack of resolve is generated by the natural tendency for sentience to generate common ground, yet not being able to understand what that is, or why that is. Some examples: one who is homophobic tends to relate far more closely to the sexuality that is feared or hated than the phobic one wishes to accept. Rejecting homosexuals, then, is a way of tangibly distancing oneself from the common ground of sexuality. Another who is homophobic may not be homosexual, himself, but simply have been taught to fear or simply does not understand this version of a common ground of sexuality. All phobias, then, are Relationships, in themselves, and in the pole of Dissonance, or unresolved common ground. An aside: Allergies, as well, fall into the category of Relationships, and always represent some form of Denial, or Dissonance. There are Relationships of Attraction and Dissonance, and all relationships will fall somewhere within that spectrum. In other words, a Relationship of Love may be Dissonant and not be Attractive, and a Relationship of Hate may be extremely Attractive. Fearing or Not Understanding your Common Ground does not preclude Love or Intimacy. Wounded Relationships are those relationships that have damaged, lost, or rejected the Common Ground that had previously been accepted. Relationships of Hate, then, are not necessarily Wounded, and Relationships of Love are not necessarily Healed. If Attraction is the acceptance and awareness of a common ground, and Dissonance is the unresolve of the fear or misunderstanding of the common ground, then ALL Relationships by definition have a Common Ground, whether the extremes of Love and Hate are involved, or not. The drama, hatred, love, passion, kindness, fighting, arguing, estrangement, romance, etc., are not indications of Wounding, then. They are simply part of the spectrum of Relationships. Wounding is ONLY when the Common Ground is lost, rejected, or damaged. That being said, the more unpleasant spectrum of feelings involved in a relationship can TEND to be associated with Wounding, but this is a tendency, not a rule or equation. In other words, just because you are estranged, or fighting, or caught up in drama, does not automatically mean there is Wounding. However, when there is Wounding, it can often result in estrangement, fighting, and drama. We share all of this so that you understand that your Relationships are as unique and as beautiful as each individual, and cannot be so simply dismissed as Wounded, just because you are unhappy or angry, etc. In fact, some relationships thrive on the Common Ground of Unhappiness or Anger. And they are far from Wounded. Wounded Relationships are usually marked by complete "reset" of the Relationship. A withdrawal from all Common Ground. The Healing comes through the efforts to re-establish, re-discover, and rebuild Common Ground. For Relationships that no longer have the other party involved, whether because of death or distance or complete rejection, Common Ground can still be re-established, re-discovered, and rebuilt. [Brian_W] how? [MEntity] Relationships are a two-way street, so to speak, but Healing does not require both parties. The short answer to how to Heal a Wounded Relationship is to re-establish, re-discover, and/or rebuild the Common Ground. When the other party is not available, it is only a matter of first identifying the most-obvious Common Ground between you. In cases where the person is distant, then Distance can actually be the starting point for Common Ground. In cases where the person has fully rejected all communication, then Hurt can be your Common Ground. In cases where the person is no longer incarnated, your Past can be your Common Ground. Identifying the very thing "between" you as your starting point of Common Ground can often diffuse that very thing. As soon as a Common Ground has been identified and accepted, Healing automatically begins. Healing a Relationship does not necessarily equate it being as you fantasize it, remember it, wish it to be. Healing a Relationship is not an investment, but a gift, for all involved. By identifying and accepting your Hurt or Distance or Past as your Common Ground, one can often free a great deal of energy that can then bring clarity, insight, patience, compassion, peace, and then those can potentially begin to be included as Common Grounds. [Brian_W] Quick question -- can distance include both temporal and / or spacial? [MEntity] Yes. All of what we have shared so far has been the basics of Relationships and Healing, and just understanding these basics can bring some relief and true Healing to some of your most difficult relationships, but also bring understanding and lightness to those relationships that are not wounded, but are simply challenging. Some of your most annoying, challenging, dramatic, and inconvenient Relationships are not so because of Wounding, but because they are simply those things. Understanding this can help you to move to address the challenges directly, instead of being concerned that there is something to "fix." Relationships come in a combination of these elements (or sets): Sexual/Physical, Emotional, Intellectual. Brief, Short-term, and Long-term. Sensual, Shallow, and Deep. All Relationships would be, at least, a combination of one element from each of these. For instance, a Relationship may be Sexual, Short-term, and Deep. Or Emotional, Brief, and Shallow. Sensual would be those relationships that share in feeling good, sharing sensations, stimulation of some sort, including pleasure. Shallow would be those relationships that require little investment, and are not concerned greatly with reward or payoff. Deep would be those relationships that encourage the transformation of fear, or Chief Features. The first set of Elements correspond to the category of Physical, and basically describe the primary means of Interaction. The second set of Elements corresponds to the category of Emotional, and basically describe the interpretation and use of Time or Inspiration. The third set of Elements correspond to the Intellect, and describe the degree of Presence, or Expression. While none of these are necessarily sequential, and can be "mixed and matched" in any number of ways, they do tend to build upon each other in the order we described. For instance, Sensual usually leads to Shallow, and Shallow leads to Deep. Physical usually leads to Emotional leads to Intellectual, etc. By the way, we do not use the term "shallow" here in any negative sense, but only in the sense of depth of investment within and between. Using the sequential tendency, it is also true of all relationships that as they move from one end of the Elements to the other, they will tend to lose emphasis on the previous. So the relationship that is Intellectual, Long-term, and Deep will include, but not necessarily emphasize Physical, Brief, and Sensual. Because this is not understood, many Long-term Mated relationships fail, because they are distracted by the social emphasis on Sensual and Sexual/Physical. The Older the soul, the more likely the Relationships will tend toward the Intellectual, Long-term, and Deep. This is true, even within closed systems, such as Aging. The longer one is in the Body, the more the Relationship with it tends toward Intellectual, Long-term, and Deep. The Whole Relationship, or the Healthy Relationship, is one that includes SPIRIT, or MIND, depending upon one's terminology, the Assimilative or Neutral Element. By "Spirit" we mean that there is an awareness of the Whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. Regardless of any combination, Spirit can be involved. The easiest way to understand "spirit," in this case, is to understand it as that part of you who knows the Relationship is serving you in some way that is meaningful, or can be meaningful. Regardless of the state of the Relationship. We share these various Elements so that you might understand the nature of your Relationship, as it began, where it is, and what you may have expected of it, and that understanding can free you to bring healing, if necessary. The subject of Relationships is as vast as any other subject we can discuss with you, but we will share one more area of consideration as it relates to Healing, before taking questions. Relationships are formed through the MODE, in terms of Overleaves. Depending upon one's Mode, Relationships will TEND to form in certain ways, and TEND to Heal in certain ways. To be brief for the sake of our limited time here, we will share those details for each Mode. RESERVE MODE: tends to be attracted to the Common Ground of History; tends to "get to know" others through their Centering; and tends to require dealing with the past as part any relationship healing process. CAUTION MODE: tends to be attracted to the Common Ground of Motives/Motivations; tends to bond/bind through the GOAL; and requires a return to SAFETY as part of any relationship healing process. PERSEVERANCE MODE: tends to be attracted to the Common Ground of Appearances or Behavior; tends to bond/bind with another through Body Type; requires tangible action as a means for healing any relationship. OBSERVATION MODE: tends to be attracted to the Common Ground of Perspective; tends to Bond/Bind through the Mode; requires feeling UNDERSTOOD as a means for healing a Relationship. POWER MODE: tends to be attracted to the Common Ground of Confidence; tends to bond/bind with another through the Attitude; and requires HONESTY as a means for healing a relationship. PASSION MODE: tends to be attracted to the Common Ground of Imagination; tends to bond/bind with others through Soul Age; and requires the experience of BEING SEEN as part of any healing of a Relationship. AGGRESSION MODE: tends to be attracted to the Common Ground of The LIFE (as a whole); tends to bond/bind with another's Role; and requires recovering INTEGRITY as a means for healing a Relationship. We share these correlations so that you can understand how you may find your angle on building Relationships, and what you might require for healing, as well as others' angle on building Relationships, and what they might require for healing. These attractions, bondings, and requirements for healing are not exclusive to each Mode, but are tendencies that can be helpful as a starting place for healing. As this is our first time communicating some of this through Troy in this way, we know that some elaboration and clarification may be necessary over time, but this is a good start. We will now take questions on the subject. [Geraldine] Please clarify why phobias and allergies are considered relationships [MEntity] Relationships here are defined by "attraction/resonance or repulsion/dissonance of a common ground that binds or bonds one to another." Phobias and allergies are relationships of repulsion/dissonance of a common ground. Phobias and Allergies are basically the differences between Conscious and Subconscious Repulsion/Dissonance. Phobias tend to be conscious dissonance and repulsions, whereas Allergies tend to be subconscious dissonance and repulsions. [Geraldine] but how are they relationships? they aren't people [MEntity] Phobias and Allergies, both, tend to be symbolic and tend to be representative of the Relationship between "you" and "yourself." That could be between "you" and your emotions, your body, your beliefs, your soul, etc. Your sexuality, your past, etc. [Geraldine] ok -- the battleground of self [MEntity] Whether it is the concept of homosexuality, or the effects of pollen, the Common Ground is "you," and how you relate to you. We can elaborate on these as a topic another time, including delineating the various allergies and what they may represent. [Maureen] In an earlier private session with you, we spoke of my ‘revulsion’ for my mother at times and you said – in short – that I would feel the revulsion of those last issues that remain with my Essence – coming to terms with my Essence's "past," and that we are most often repulsed by reflections more than by perceptions. Then you said: “Deciding how to handle such behaviour would give great insight into where you are within yourself/Essence in terms of resolving those remaining conflicts.” Do you have any suggestions for how I (or one) might specifically go about resolving these conflicts from “within”, from the “past”? [MEntity] By responding to your question, we skip ahead to the Application part of our exchange with you: First: determine if there actual wounding, which is defined by your having once shared an identified and accepted common ground; Second: ask if that shared and identified common ground has been lost, damaged, or rejected; Third: identify any common ground you may have, even if it is not one you prefer; Fourth: take responsibility for your part of the Dissonance/Repulsion by understanding what it is, based on your Mode. In your case, with Observation Mode, it may be that you are repulsed by lacking shared perceptions, and not feeling understood; [Maureen] I'm more revulsed by my mother not understanding her own behavior -- and then "owning it" - it is less (now) about her understanding me. [MEntity] By "take responsibility" we mean that you can accept that these are things that are important to you, not only in terms of how they are provided for you, but by others, for themselves. The "reflection" here is that you are just as hard on yourself, as on your mother, in your expectations, standards, and efforts to self-monitor and control yourself. The Dissonance or unresolve here is that you dislike this part of you as much as you need it, and when you see someone else disregard such a priority for you, it is repulsive. This is not to say that these expectations, standards, and efforts are "wrong," but that they are your own. In the end, you are resentful and hurt for having to become your own parent. [Maureen] That hit a nerve... [MEntity] The Common Ground between the two of you is that you are both hurting, you are both children, with the difference between you being that you feel you had to take up the slack for your mother not doing the work of her own healing or maturing. You want some recognition for what you have had to do to "grow up" before you wanted to, or should have to, grow up. Your mother epitomizes the pattern you have with others in your life, as well, in terms of your having to take the "adult" role, even as you would prefer not to. We speak to this, based on our interpretation of records here, but we may be incorrect. [Maureen] it sounds right - thanks! [MEntity] The difference between your mother and others is that most of the other relationships were chosen, while you are "stuck" with your mother. Once one can take responsibility for what it is at the heart of the Dissonance/Repulsion, then one can go to the Fifth step of taking responsibility for what tends to be required for Healing. As this relates to the Mode. For your example, Observation tends to require feeling understood, or that another person understands. Either asking for what you require, or providing it yourself, can free the relationship to move toward Healing. The Sixth step would be in understanding what might be required of the other individual for Healing. In your case, your mother requires the same as you. She needs to feel understood as much as you need to feel, and because this is a Mode that "slides," each you may move to other requirements. In your case, you slide to Passion/Reserve, which means that you need the Past to be dealt with, and/or to Be Seen. And your mother, sliding to Power, requires Honesty, which means that she may have to say what she feels, even if it is not true to you, and she will benefit from your being Honest, and saying what is true for you, even if not immediately true for her. It is the Honesty that is required, though, if Healing is to be. The Seventh step then would be in recognizing or allowing SPIRIT to return, which basically means remembering or creating a higher meaning and value of the relationship that transcends even the challenges and joys. We will return to these steps in a moment. First, we will respond to the other questions. [Martha] Can healing of a relationship spread to other parallels where the relationship is also wounded? [MEntity] No. Technically, no. The work of one parallel will not impact the state of another, but the work of one parallel can draw toward a merge with another parallel that is similar in state due to the work of healing. For example: one parallel may be in no need of healing, while another is. The one that requires healing can eventually merge with the other parallel, if healing is accomplished. [Brian_W] This might tie into Maureen's question, as I definitely see how this applies to healing relationships with others, but in general, what would be the common ground with ourselves? [MEntity] Your idea of "you," your heart, your feelings, your identity, your desires, your cravings, your body, your health, your self-image, etc. Anything that could be described as "yours" would be the common ground. For example, the homophobe would be in a dissonant relationship with his sexuality through the symbolic concept of homosexuality and the homosexuals who exemplify it. [ClaireC] Can you give me some insight as to what the "difference between Conscious and Subconscious Repulsion/Dissonance" is behind my sister's chronic, severe allergies? [MEntity] Keep in mind that there is a vast difference between intolerances and allergies, and chronic, severe intolerances are not indicative of anything but genetics, which may or may not have been intentional as part of the design of the Body. Allergies trigger an immune system reaction, whereas intolerances do not. We would have to look at the details of these allergies to determine the dissonance/denial behind them, and at this point we cannot. [ClaireC] Hers are environmental allergies, it seems. [MEntity] If the allergies are legitimate, and environmentally-related, then this often reflects the dissonance between you and "your world." This often comes from a denial of one's power, or right to be, in the world. When we say "environmentally-related," we mean that it is an immune reaction to several threats that are common in the average person's environment, and usually includes an array. If it is specifically pollen, or dander, for instance, then the dissonance may be different. [ClaireC] Definitely allergic to both pollen and dander. [MEntity] In terms of applying this information, we suggest looking at one of your suggested three relationships that may require healing, and walk through the initial list of details for Relationships, and see how that relationship might be interpreted and understood differently. And then use the steps outlined with Maureen for determining if and how a relationship may need healing. [ClaireC] Yes, that was very helpful information that can be applied to all relationships. [MEntity] We are fading, however, and this channel must stop for now. Troy can continue work with the application aspect in your group forum.
Ask Michael Live Chat April 5, 2015 Channel: Troy Tolley Kurtis: Hi Michael, today i'd like to continue with the Idealist in a social situation. I especially liked your additions of "What did you expect" and other such phrases last time, so if you can include those I'd appreciate. Kurtis: The phrases were in the response to the Realist question btw, just to jog your memory MEntity: The Idealist in social situations is constantly measuring against an ideal. Both the self and others are being assessed, sized up, compared, measured, and calculated in ways that can be mind-boggling to those not an Idealist. Idealists can be of the most clearly and strongly-opinionated of the Attitudes, with some of the strongest arguments in support of those opinions and perspectives. MEntity: Idealists can tend to read the languages of your body in ways that go far beyond the use of your words. Idealists will often respond more to what was not said than to what was said, because Idealists can see/hear beyond the facades or measured responses. MEntity: Idealists are so prone to looking beyond what IS and into the projected patterns from what is, that they can sometimes be out of sync with the experiences of others around them. In other words, while others may see/hear exactly what is being said/shown, the Idealist is accessing dimensions that extend from there. MEntity: In the Positive Pole, there is Coalescence. This is the pulling together of the necessary parts that fulfill the ideal or the assessed pattern. MEntity: This means that the Positive Idealist may compare, measure, assess, and predict accurate patterns, but always remembers that there is more. There will always be more. This Idealist may be very clear and accurate in her understanding of the self or another person, but always makes room for variables. MEntity: The Positive Idealist is not conclusive. MEntity: This lack of conclusivity and room for variables is also what makes them of the most Naive, the Negative Pole. MEntity: Idealists will often "see the best" in you, in herself, even as there is neglect, abuse, and pain. MEntity: Idealists can, also, hold you or the self to a standard of expectation that is often unmatched, leading to another version of Naivety that is constantly pitting you against what SHOULD be. MEntity: So Naivety can show up here as the inability to discern what further parts might be necessary for fulfilling an ideal, or show up as the inability to see that there are no further parts so the ideal cannot be fulfilled. MEntity: Idealists will always tend to challenge your resting place for what is expected of yourself, themselves, and others. MEntity: As usual, there is always more to explore in these topic-length questions, but this can be added to the explorations. Janet: I believe you have said that after death the personality experiences -- for awhile at least -- whatever that personality expected to experience after death. So, for instance, if they believed there was no life after death, they would experience nothingness until they finally woke up and realized that there was something there after all. Janet: I am wondering about people whose personalities are more or less gone well before death. Those with Alzheimer’s, for instance, don’t show any trace of the beliefs the personality had before losing touch with reality, but of course it’s hard to tell what they actually believe when they are lost to the condition. Janet: Do those with Alzheimer’s or dementia experience their personality’s core beliefs after death? Or maybe even before death? Or do they become more in touch with the truth about what happens after death due to what I assume is more astral activity after the personality loses touch with physical reality? MEntity: Janet, many who die experience a very different death from what was expected, even if they professed to know what to expect. Death brings the truth to the surface. Many Personalities cloak their inability to comprehend death by embracing others' stories of death, or ignoring it, or distracting themselves. So even if someone professes to believe in a heaven after death, this heaven is not necessarily what is experienced because the Personality did not truly believe there is a heaven. Or a hell, for that matter. But it is true that when the Personality is truly invested in and believes in an after-death expectation, it is generated and experienced. MEntity: The after-death reality is as varied as cities in the Physical Plane, so the Astral is populated with "cities" dedicated to the more sustained versions of after-life. There even variations on themes, so that there are multiple "heavens" and "hells" to accommodate. They remain a hoot to visit. MEntity: As for those who disconnect from a life over a greater length of time, the realization and waking up is less about the after-life, but about the current life. MEntity: The etheric body loses its anchor in time, and is free to explore within the timeline of that lifetime. MEntity: Review tends to be the theme for most, as the life is replayed, revisited, and recreated. MEntity: This can leave the Body as an anchor point in time that is, quite literally, hosting for the Personality as it existed throughout the life. MEntity: All sub-personalities are freed. MEntity: It is both chaotic and beautiful, but "death" is not experienced until the body is no longer breathing. MEntity: As long as the body is breathing, or "alive," the Personality is, too. MEntity: Though the Personality is not anchored in time, it is processing the life, not the death. GeraldineB: This is from Brian: I'd like some basic level information on how can we recognize and stop thinking of things in terms of "black and white" / polarized thinking? MEntity: First, it is fairly impossible not to think in terms of "black and white," as duality is natural and helpful. We describe polarities for this reason. However, one way to help keep one from locking into one or the other is to always remember that one is inclusive of the other. There will always be one part of a duality that is inclusive of the more exclusive part. "White" is the presence all color, whereas "black" is the absence of color. However, it could be said that there is nothing inherently "wrong" with black or white, only differences in function or nature. MEntity: White reflects, and Black absorbs. Positive reflects, and Negative absorbs. Love remembers and Fear forgets. MEntity: So thinking in polarities is not the problem. It is when one does NOT think in polarities that the problems come. MEntity: In other words, if one thinks that one should only aim for light, then shadows will be terrifying. If one thinks that there are only shadows, then one cannot see. MEntity: If black is consuming your life, you are merely forgetting about what is reflecting, what is present, and what is color. If one only thinks that white is pure, then he is forgetting that white cannot exist as itself. It is a higher sum from the parts. MEntity: So when you feel as if you are thinking only terms of black and white, or polarized, remember that it is not the polarity that is the problem, it is that the polarity now presents you with the responsibility of CHOICE. MEntity: Choice is the color between the extremes of black and white. ViP: Do the body types influence how Centering operates, or vice-versa? For example, if a person has a passive/negative Nature body type, does that influence the types of forms or feelings that are generated from the Part of the Center that one habitually operates from? This was just to illustrate one possible example, but any more general explanation would be great as well. MEntity: Yes, there are some consistent correlations to consider, but they are only for consideration, not presented as rules: MEntity: Martial and Venusian TEND to require and generate TANGIBLE effects from the processes of their Centering, regardless of the Centering/Part. They tend toward the benefit of affection, touch, and seeing/feeling the impact of their presence. MEntity: Mercury/Jovial TEND to require and generate FEEDBACK from the processes of their Centering, regardless of Centering/Part. They tend toward the benefit of conversation, expression, and exchange of ideas. ViP: Are these in terms of these body types as Nature, or just based on which body type is Primary/highest percentage? MEntity: Lunar/Saturn TEND to require and generate ALLIANCE from the processes of their Centering, regardless of Centering/Part. They tend toward the benefit of mutual interests, raw honesty, and consistency. MEntity: All of the above are in terms of the Body Type that dominates, regardless of Nature, Appearance, or Health. MEntity: However, there will always be a mix. MEntity: The above are tendencies as described in very simplistic and short paragraphs, but you may be able to see the validity that can lead to more detailed exploration. Luciana: "Could you explain the potential reasons for unjustified fears in life, such as a fear of dogs despite not having been attacked or bitten by one?" MEntity: We cannot explain them with one explanation, no. We can suggest that phobias are often symbolic of deeper issues, or speak to imprinted ideas that have origins that are forgotten. Many phobias are as simple as having heard a loud sound at the same time as the object of phobia being presented for the first time. For instance, many who fear buttons do so because of the experience of MEntity: rushed buttoning of clothes while toddlers or younger. Many who are afraid of dogs when one has no obvious cause for it are afraid because a parent was afraid. These instances can register and remain intact as indications of threat, even as there is no threat. Many fear snakes, not because they have been threatened by snakes, but because "everyone" is afraid of snakes. MEntity: Some phobias are inherent in the Instinctive Center and activated by those around the individual through imprinting. Some phobias are taught. Some are deeply symbolic. Some are not relevant to the object of phobia at all, but the object just happens to work. For example, if someone has a fear of intimacy that is repressed, he might redirect this as an allergy to cats, denying his fear of intimacy. MEntity: Many who are afraid of dogs are afraid of people. MEntity: Dogs become the focus of that fear. MEntity: A distrust in people translates into this phobia for dogs. MEntity: One must deal with people on a regular basis, so the fear is repressed to a great degree and redirects toward "man's best friend," since this can quite easily play out the actual fears and distrust of "being bitten" by people. MEntity: This is because dogs have come to regarded as extensions of people. MEntity: It is then "safer" to fear dogs and to navigate around them than it is to cripple oneself to the fears and distrust of all people. MEntity: Some phobias come up because of triggers that resonate with past lives, of course, when that which is feared is somehow linked to harm or death that went unresolved. However, it will still be true that this is relevant to issues in the current life. Experiences from Past lives are not imposed on a life, but they can be activated by the current life. MEntity: The above are some broad examples to help understand the nature of phobias.