Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'validating'.
Originally posted on August 22, 2013 Opening up a discussion thread to discuss "What is Validation?" One of Michael's biggest insistences is "Validate, Validate, Validate." But most of us have never been taught to validate. We really don't know what the term means. So, we scramble around attempting to accomplish something that is at best a vague idea. I've spent the past several years writing a blog, "Validating Michael," which in large part was just proving to myself that Michael was "real." Then, it was a matter of attempting to validate the accuracy of Troy's work. And, the best way I found to accomplish those two distinctly separate things was "validating channeled material" against my own history, which has proven to be quite elusive as there are arcs of experience across millions of years that are all part of my Instinctive Center. Plus, I attend the Open Michael Workshops (OMW) which is continuously adding material that applies to me specifically and needs validation. Similarly, I simply have an ongoing awareness of statements Michael has said as they apply to the various belief systems of our world. If they are right for objective information, it gives them better credibility for the things that are more subjective. The following is one of the many questions and answers about validation: [Excerpt from TT: 2011-06-12] [Brian_W] In a previous time it was mentioned that “Imagination is the highest frequency owned by a physical fragment and its use is entirely misunderstood by many, at least in terms of its use for “extra-sensory” perceptions.” Could you please comment on how we may better use and understand our own imaginations and dreams, differentiate them from delusion, and use them to create new options for choices in this world / parallel? [MEntity] The key to the refinement and use of Imagination as a valid resource for creating new options and choices is through the process of Validation. Imagination will include a spectrum from the greatest potential to the greatest delusion. Validation is the process of measuring a new feeling, thought, or action against an established feeling, thought, or action. Internal Validation is vital for helping one to build his or her Personal Philosophies (truths), Relationships (loves), and Health (energy). External Validation is vital for helping one to share his or her Personal Truths, Relationships, and Health/Energy. True Validation is when both the Inner and Outer Validations coincide. Because Imagination is unlimited, the use of it can be a wonderful and dangerous process. We will say that as long as your Imagination must be kept to yourself in order to be “true,” then it is probably leaning toward Delusion, and away from Potential. We will say that as long as the majority of feedback from your outer world is contradictory to your Imagination, then it is, at least, still potential, which includes potentially delusional. One can see why this can be “tricky,” as one fragment full of potential may have surrounded oneself with fragments who challenge the Imagination, in general, and this can lead to questioning or rejecting one’s Imagination, while another fragment might be completely delusional and supported by many. However, we can say that the more one finds his or her footing in validating the Imagination, both internally and externally, the more one moves away from delusion. We will say that a safe equation might be that one who has not validated the potential of the Imagination within, will either find oneself surrounded by rejection of the potential, or support for the delusional. Response to original posting by DianeHB referenced this OMW that originally was members only: Validating your profile Validation -- No Two Are the Same This was originally posted as a separate item on February 4, 2010, but it fits within this topic. Validation of channeling remains the purview of each individual. But few of us really do attempt to validate or even understand some of the processes that go into it. The newer we are to Michael the more we are likely to fall into head nodding agreement with anything any channel says unless something totally dissonances rather than resonates with us, at least after our intial period of skepticism. One of our cultural imprintings is to want to belong to a group, which means edging towards agreement regardless of understanding. Afterall, "all of them" know more and aren't objecting. Or, to get along, we must go along. Yeah -- not very conducive to real validation, is it? The biggest issue I grapple with regarding channeling is understanding just how different each of us is--how our language, knowledge levels, beliefs, and imprinting filters everything that comes through us. Generally, we attempt to find all of the points of commonality about our humanity; so, this reversal requires acceptance of a myriad of subtleties. Even the statement by Michael that even the best channel on his/her best day is only about 80% accurate is suspect -- was THIS statement accurate? However, since it has been repeated via other channels, it likely is. However, parroting, whether it's unconscious or conscious, is a very real fact of human psyche; so, while I give it high marks, I can't give it 100% personal validation. Just how different is our language? It is substantially different. Do you really think that Michael is totally up to date on American slang? That all is coming from the channel's personal knowledge base. Education, whether formal or self, is part of the basis for all of our language use. But the cultural milieu that we function in is an even bigger impact on how we choose words or understand them. I slide between using very precisely chosen words to sloppy slang. Some never struggle to find a precise word and operate within a smaller range of word choices, most words which have multiple meanings. Some are current on popular culture slang and some operate on slang from a bygone era (i.e., groovy, or cool). Most of us have adopted some multi-generational slang from within our families, but, MY multi-generational slang reaches back into the early 1900s. (Another aspect of being 65 is that my grandparents were born around 1890, which is very much a part of the Victorian period.) Plus, beyond education and popular culture, there is trade or business jargon. Words take on different meanings, sometimes rigidly precise ones, within the world of commerce. Add in the international flavor of the Michael student body, and it's fairly easy to see that it's far easier to assume commonality on language meaning and use than it is to prove it. Michael has chosen some very precise words that he uses through most of his channels. They have precise "Michael" meanings. It's important for every channel and student to learn that vocabulary and apply it whenever discussing anything Michael. This can give all students a better point of commonality on the teachings. Knowledge levels is fairly easy to understand as being a barrier to commonality, except none of us wear a placard around our necks extolling all of the things we do or do not know. Because *I* know something, it's easy to assume that not only others know it, or even worse, that it's easy for others to learn. Plus, due to the various points of clashing commonality, none of us learned precisely the same thing even if we read the same book, took the same class, or listened to the same audio. Not only do we not know the same things, we have varying levels of agreement with those things. Why do you think people argue so much? Beliefs. Ahh, yes. Beliefs. Beliefs and imprinting really need to go hand-in-hand, as beliefs begin at our mother's breast and stay with us in some form or other until they put us into that old pine box. Many a major break in families occurs when young adults go through their 3rd IM and throw off part of the family belief system -- rebels think they have to discard ALL if any part of wrong and for many parents their own poorly examined beliefs shudder like a house of cards when any part is deemed wrong. But, beyond that, beliefs stay with us like CFs, forever swirling in and out of everything we learn and do. You may think you discarded one belief for a TRUTH, but, you didn't -- it's in there still to frustrate your logic and make you a hypocrite. As enough years go by, older beliefs can be diminished in power, but they still provide a patina to one's current belief system, even if in opposition. So, back to the original question -- how accurate is any channel on any given day? But, beyond that dilemma, how accurate is the student on any given day? For me, I've had to adopt a semi-fluid semi-tolerant sliding scale of acceptance and understanding in order to validate anything from Michael as being "highly likely, probable, maybe when I know more, channel's personality, good lord, where did THAT come from!!!" In fact why I quote Michael is to examine whatever he has said in an ongoing validation quest. I've found that re-reading books, articles, logs, quotes, etc., to be very effective as things that blew right over my head during the initial read are suddenly relevant and within the scope of understanding now. I like the use of the terms "resonate" and "validate" versus agree and disagree. They imply a scale of possibilities versus a wall. Strong agreement is just as big a barrier to an open mind as is strong disagreement. Troy responded to this post with the following: Michael has clarified over the years for various students what is meant by Validation and how to go about it, and they've delineated it into 4 versions of Validation: INTERNAL VALIDATION - deciding what is true for you based on personal assessment and experience, regardless of whether it's true in any other way EXTERNAL VALIDATION - deciding what is true for you based on external feedback and facts, regardless of your personal truths, assessments, and experience TRUE VALIDATION - when Internal and External are mutual FALSE VALIDATION - when any truth goes unquestioned, or denies internal or external feedback, but is fully embraced Michael then goes on to say that the ultimate aim is for True Validation, but that all of these forms are important at different stages and in different experiences of a life, even False Validation, such as those moments when a child has gone missing and there is NOTHING to grasp onto, internally or externally. False Validation is what Michael says is often called "Hope." When life or experiences are in question, Michael has always encouraged our Internal Validation as our safety net, and that's because the more we learn to trust ourselves, the more honest we tend to be with ourselves, and the more honest we tend to be with ourselves, the more we attract support and create alignment within our external world, and the more aligned we become, the more that external world tends to offer feedback and facts that validate our internal world, leading to True Validation. True Validation is the combination of internal and external reality that leads to a wholeness, and in that wholeness comes much more comfort and less threat in letting go of both the Internal and External factors that can't find a find validation in both directions. Keeping in mind the 3 Degrees of Truth (Personal, Planetary, and Universal), you can see that the validation process allows room for all truths. Michael says that the key to Validation is in the understanding of how you've come to the conclusion that something is true, and how you allow that to change, if necessary, and that validation is not really a matter of whether it's "really" true, or not. There's a lot more to it than this, because they then go into what tests and processes we can use for Internal, External, and True Validation, but I'll post that another day... My internal validation says I'm exhausted and my external validation shows it's after 5am... so my True Validation is that I should get to bed. lol
July 1, 2004 Troy Tolley, Channel Michael Speaks Online – Open Floor [Note: Here is the transcript from Thursday’s Chat! It was great! I have asked Michael for some clarification on some of it, so there is editing involved. Enjoy! Troy] [M Entity] Hello to everyone. We are here with you. Tonight we will open the floor to any questions or topics of interest to each of you as best we can. Troy has restrictions against personal questions, but if you have a way to present a question that is beneficial for all, we will attempt to respond accordingly. [kittlekats41] This is based on a personal experience, but I am interested in an answer that everyone can relate to: when we moved down to Atlanta we stopped overnight at a hotel. Upon arrival here [to Atlanta] the energy felt off-centered and discordant, which it hadn’t been before. One of the cats was especially vocal and restless. We determined that we had picked up a ‘stray’ energy that attached itself to us at the hotel with a number of others; we were able to clean the space and remove the energy into a better environment for it – an old tree that is grounded. The question is: a) how common is it for this type of experience to occur? b) how can we deal with it when it does? and c) are animals a common barometer to identify when it happens? That is my question:-) [M Entity] We would first respond that we would not describe any energy as “stray” that might attach itself to you randomly. We have rarely seen a case of energetic resonance that was not in some way “invited” or allowed. However, what you refer to as “hotels” and “motels” are full of what might accurately be described as “echo energies”. In other words, the emotional and intellectual imprints from the many fragments passing through a small space (which is assumed by fragments to be a sanctuary in many ways) can become literally “coated” with these “echoes” of energy. In the same way that there are “ghosts” of the dead, there are “ghosts” of the living, as well. “Ghosts” are merely echoes of energy, whether from the living or the dead. With all of that being said, your being affected by an echo is based on a particular resonance you must have had with that “echo”. It appears to us that you were in a space of deeper concern, worry, anticipation, and possibly anxiety, than you were in the previous trip. [kittlekats41] true [M Entity] This would naturally align you with any other fragment's concerns, worries, anticipations, anxiety that had left an imprint in that hotel room or location. This alignment then would naturally amplify your own energy, yet again, and because it then becomes disproportional to your original concerns, etc., it can feel strangely disconcerting and distracting. [kittlekats41] would that echo remain as a presence for a number of weeks afterwards and be detected by the animals? [M Entity] We will respond to your questions as quickly and as orderly as possible. The way you can “deal with this” is to consciously “clear the space” in any environment that has acted as a sanctuary for so many other fragments. Doing so upon settling into your room can greatly increase your experience of peace and temporary ownership of that space. A simple visualization of a colorful light of your choice sweeping through the room and clearing it of all darker or heavier energies is enough. It is not necessary to create an elaborate ritual; just a simple, conscious shifting of the room’s energy to accommodate you is enough. We would suggest avoiding rituals focusing on “protection”, as this simply amplifies a contrast between you and your space and does not effect a peaceful, restful shift. Animals are more sensitive to these echoes than most humans, but they are even more sensitive to the effects of the echoes on their human companions. In other words, your animal companion was responding to your own agitations than to the separate “stray energy” you theorized. The “echo” remains only in the space in which is imprinted, but the effects of that echo upon you can last for weeks. It was Good Work that you created time to transform that effect upon you and to ground yourself again. [BradburySE] I just have a question about the number of inputs for the various roles. It seems to be well known that Artisans have five inputs and Sages three, but how about the other roles? I've never seen this written anywhere. [M Entity] The “solid roles” of King, Warrior, and Scholar have a single input, while the inspirational roles of Priest and Server have 2 inputs. [H2OSprtlvr] We were talking about the 9/11 movie by Michael Moore and it was mentioned that he is a Sage and he had a reincarnation from Josiah Royce. This seems confusing to me that he is a Sage, because all the studying and fact finding is so Scholar. I was wondering where the Scholar might be in his personality, since Sages only want to have fun and are not into fact finding or writing books. [M Entity] First we will say that we have never said, nor have we implied, that Sages “only want to have fun” and that they are not “into fact finding or writing books”. This conclusion is highly simplified and inaccurate of the Sage and of the Scholar. The very Essence of a Sage is to find the Truth and then to disseminate what they have come to believe is true. In that search for the Truth, they will use any means possible. The stereotype of the Sage comes from the fact that in most cases a Sage's method of “fact-finding” and “writing books” simply ends up looking like so much more “fun”. By contrast, the Scholars have been responsible for some of the most influential and “beautiful” music on your planet. This could look contrary to the stereotype of the Scholar, but in fact the Scholar finds the connection between music and math to be one of the most beautiful aspects of life on earth and if that can be translated into music, they will try. We explain this to you to help contribute to your broadening understanding of the Roles of Sage and Scholar. This is not to say that the fragment now known as Michael Moore does not have Scholar influences, because, in fact, he actually does. This Sage is Scholar-Cast, with a Server Essence Twin. [H2OSprtvr] I realize I was stereotyping and I'm grateful for further clarification on the roles. [M Entity] Comparing the lives of Beethoven and Royce/Moore can give you great insight into the differences between how a Sage-Cast Scholar (Beethoven) vs. a Scholar-Cast Sage (Michael Moore) may act within a lifetime. In most cases, a Sage-Cast individual will behave more like the “stereotypical” Sage than a Sage with different Casting. Furthermore, in most instances when a fragment is behaving like one of the Essence “stereotypes”, it is usually an indicator of that person's Casting than of their Role. [BingeBuddie] I know this may seem like a very basic question, but I have had a hard time validating my role in essence. With so many factors to consider such as casting, ET influence, overleaves, and entity position, etc. is there any definitive way to determine your role? I’ve went with channels in the past, but that causes confusion because its difficult to tell what one input is as opposed to many inputs, such as Scholar having one and Artisan having 5. One channel Roles (Scholar, King, and Warrior) can concentrate in the midst of chaos right? So that's kind of what I try to look at. Is that a good indicator? [M Entity] No, we would not suggest using your ability to concentrate as your determining factor. The symptom of concentration vs. distraction in terms of Input is another of the simplifications that can happen when first learning about a part of the teaching. While it is true that an Essence with a single input can usually focus more intently in the midst of chaos, the influence of Personality, Imprinting, and Situations can greatly affect that level of concentration. What we would suggest as part of your validation of your Role in Essence is this: First, study the Roles. It is important to truly comprehend each Role. This means moving beyond the stereotypes that are a part of the initial stage of learning. Next, it is important to understand the vital differences between Essence and Casting. Casting affects how you behave “naturally”, how you express yourself to the world on a DAILY BASIS. Your Essence Role is most obviously comprehended in moments where you feel you SHINE. For instance: A Scholar-Cast Sage: In the daily life of this individual he may appear unkempt, distracted, refined, studious, directed, serious, and maybe even a bit out of synch socially, but this fragment would “shine” as soon as he was able to publicly share what he has gained as experiences in a way that was entertaining to at least a small group. A Sage-Cast Scholar, on the other hand, may be dramatic, socially obnoxious, emotional, depressed, extreme, performing, and chaotic in his daily life, but this fragment would “shine” when he is able to wholly comprehend something that can be finalized as a bit of profound personal knowledge. We do not know of a more appropriate word than “shine”. When you are in Essence, you feel complete, “on”, and you usually feel cohesion between your mundane self and your higher self. When we say “shine”, we do not intend to mean that everyone will see this, but rather that the Personality and Essence open to each other and a sense of lightness and wholeness pervade. We explain all of this to you in the context of an Essence having a different Role than Casting, but of course, there ARE Sage-Cast Sages and Scholar-Cast Scholars, but those fragments usually have little confusion as to their Role. Having explained those basic differences between Casting and Role in Essence, you can then figure out your Role or Casting by first determining if you feel you are more exalted or more ordinal in either of those contexts. In other words, in your DAILY LIFE, are you more one-on-one, but when you “shine”, are you surrounded by people? One-on-One might indicate a more Ordinal position, while being inclined toward groups can be an indication of an Exalted position. Once you have determined how you may behave in either context, you can then determine if you feel you are more compelled to have an inspiring, expressive, or active effect on your environment. This will then give you an indication as to the final role description you might be in your Casting or your Essence. For example, you may notice you are naturally more one-on-one in your daily life, thus indicating that you may be Ordinal-Cast, but when you “shine”, you notice you love to be in a group of people in some way, indicating you may be an Exalted Essence Role. Then you would determine if you are more inclined to be expressive, inspiring, or active in your daily life. If you find you are more concerned with inspiring, you could then safely start trying out the idea that you may be SERVER-CAST. When you “shine”, you may find you are more inclined to be expressive, entertaining, and teaching-oriented, which may indicate a SAGE ESSENCE. This would then be a Server-Cast Sage. We realize this can still be very confusing and difficult to determine, but it is a start. Because the Scholar Role is neutral, it can be the most difficult to determine and we would not be able to convey in this format the depth of questioning that would need to be explored for true validation of the Essence or Casting. One of the most important things you can do while studying our teaching and seeking to validate your Role, Casting, Overleaves, Entity, and Essence Twins, etc. is be open to an evolution of your understanding. You may discover that what you believed was inaccurate channeling is actually profoundly accurate to who you realize you are becoming (as you come into your own identity). Or you may discover that your self-determined Overleaves were highly inaccurate in your initial understanding and you now see that you are someone completely different after all. Never feel as if you must conclude who you are. Our system is designed to help you understand who you are, not complicate your self-perception. If you are thoroughly confused, pick a Role, pick your Overleaves, and begin “living with them”. You will begin to see what does and does not hold validity. [BingeBuddie] But would you have to be past the 4th internal monad to judge completely accurately as to what role you are? (not to ask ANOTHER lengthy question) [M Entity] It does help to have completed the 4th Internal Monad in the Positive Pole for true self-awareness in terms of Essence, Casting, and True Personality. But then, that is the very crux of having a completion of the 4th Internal Monad in the Positive Pole, so it is not a matter of waiting for that rite to pass before seeking valid self-awareness. We are working with Troy in creating two new ways of determining your own basic profiles: a self-test, and a step-by-step process of elimination method. We believe this will help many of our students. We never sought to have any student dependent on our channels, so this is an important evolution to our sharing of the teachings. We believe we have given you at least some “food for thought” until then. [freyaisissuz] That's great, Troy, I will keep it short. I have sensed a connection with J Royce/M Moore. Is he a “reality shifter” or “dream maker” as in cadre 1/entity 3; if another, where? [M Entity] That is a valid observation. This is a fragment some of our channels would call a “wild card” within Cadre One, Entity Three, as well. This fragment is one of the youngest soul ages in that Entity. (3rd Level Mature) If there are no more questions, we will conclude for the evening. If there are more questions, we will take one more. [BradburySE]: A quick one [M Entity] Yes, Shannon, we will conclude with your question. [BradburySE] Who is this other “Dogma Dismantler” besides Michael Moore of whom you spoke in Troy’s energy report? Where will we find him, and is he or she now incarnated? [M Entity] Yes, he is incarnated: a Server Essence Twin of the Sage known as Michael Moore. The Server is a reincarnation of William James now focusing on the funneling of necessary requirements as a means to convey the Sage's “truth”. He may only be peripherally identified in the media. We believe he is one of the “producers” of Michael Moore's films, as well as several of his own projects which reflect some of the profound psychology explored in his previous life as William James. [BradburySE] Thank you, we can figure it out from here most likely! ? [M Entity] This relationship would appear to be more like a Task Companion relationship, but that is not the case. The relationship is taut with disagreements and power struggles, regardless of the powerful results. Good night to all of you. We will conclude here.