MT complexity

[Jean-François Lozevis]

A new ranting of mine (I like this word 'ranting' not sure of its French counterpart).

 

I'm amazed by the sheer complexity of MT: there are dozens of concepts.

 

I was told elsewhere that life is simple; I say 'simple' and not 'easy'.

 

Moreover, in my computer programming, I try to follow the 'KISS' principle which is 'Keep It Simple, Stupid'.

 

Is it possible to sum up Michael Teachings in 3 or 4 simple sentences?

 

The only one coming at the moment in my mind is:

All is choices

 

Others are too complicated.

 

[petra]

@Jean-François Lozevis  The dozens of concepts who have arisen in the Michael Teachings come mostly from the questions of us, the Students, and You answered the question = All is choice, and You do not have to believe a word Michael is saying. Gravity will exist if You believe in it or not.

I love Your KISS principle and therefore are blowing a kiss to You 

[Maureen]

57 minutes ago, Jean-François Lozevis said:

A new ranting of mine (I like this word 'ranting' not sure of its French counterpart).

 

I'm amazed by the sheer complexity of MT: there are dozens of concepts.

 

I was told elsewhere that life is simple; I say 'simple' and not 'easy'.

 

Moreover, in my computer programming, I try to follow the 'KISS' principle which is 'Keep It Simple, Stupid'.

 

Is it possible to sum up Michael Teachings in 3 or 4 simple sentences?

 

The only one coming at the moment in my mind is:

All is choices

 

Others are too complicated.

 

Michael has summed up their own teaching in a nutshell. We are here to learn how to choose, and to choose how to learn.  That's it.

 

[Philip Wittmeyer]

Attached find a "Study Paper" on this topic from a book manuscript that I am working on.

It addition to that offering, may I also offer that the Michael Teaching may seem complex when one is first exposed to it. One reason for this might be that most members of the original Michael group were intellectually centered, and the Teaching is formulated and presented as an intellectual teaching, and that center is prone to enjoy complexity. Recall also that the Michaels themselves reside on the Scholar-ish level of the Artisan-ish plane, so they are prone to frame their Teaching intellectually. However, one of the goals of the Michaels was to teach their students how to cut through the complexity that we see in this world, and get to the simplicity above and below the complex levels. You will read about that in the attached Study Paper.

ComplexitySimplicity.pdf

[Petter]

@Jean-François Lozevis 

I agree about the teachings being very complex. Seems to me that it has just become more and more complex over the years, and I feel quite overwhelmed at this point (I've been coming regularly to TLE for 12 years now). I also feel like my engagement with the teachings is becoming increasingly superficial the more complex it becomes.

 

For several years now I've been wanting to ask Michael the following question: "I feel quite overwhelmed by the complexity of your teachings. If I were to focus on just one or two aspects of your teachings for this lifetime, which aspects would you recommend that I focus on?"

 

Unfortunately I haven't been able to prioritize this question yet, and with the high cost of sessions now it will probably be quite a while until I order another session.

 

Thinking about this question though, my best guess is that the information about Chief Features is the most important part of the teachings. In my view it's very unique information, and the only part of the teachings that I really feel has had a deep impact on me. To fully understand how the Chief Features affects you, you also need to understand the Overleaves, so I guess those two parts of the teachings are the most important. By implementing those I believe someone can really make positive changes in their life.

 

I know this is not exactly what you asked for, but these are some of my thoughts on the complexity of the teachings, and what I think the core of the teachings is.

[Janet]

Michael does not care if you know or understand the vast complex of their teaching that has evolved over the years. Well, they don't care if you know or understand anything at all about their teaching.

 

Probably, as others have said, the concept of choice is the biggest thing to "get" in what they teach. 

 

Beyond that, to me the most important things they teach are concepts that might have practical application in our lives. To the extent that anything they teach doesn't resonate or you can't find a way to make practical use of it -- well, then don't bother with it. You might come back later and find it useful, and yet it just may never be something you need in your life. 

 

So, while I find their answers to student questions about "life, the universe and everything" to be absolutely fascinating, the "basic" teachings are what I find most useful. I use knowledge of the Roles and Soul Age and Overleaves, etc., to try to understand those I meet and interact with, especially those that have a point of view that I find obnoxious or alien. I think this basic info might also be useful in interacting with my grandchildren: I don't know for sure as it's an experiment I couldn't try with my children because I hadn't "remembered" Michael yet. 

 

2 hours ago, Petter said:

For several years now I've been wanting to ask Michael the following question: "I feel quite overwhelmed by the complexity of your teachings. If I were to focus on just one or two aspects of your teachings for this lifetime, which aspects would you recommend that I focus on?"

Several years ago, I asked Michael what they would present as the "basics" of their teaching if they were starting today. They actually indicated "one or two aspects" to focus on:

 

Here is part of that conversation:

 

Janet: 

When you began teaching them through the Ouija Board back in the 1970s, you made use of their background knowledge (e.g., Gurdjieff’s teaching) to begin to pass on the basics of your Personality System. Others who have written beginner books for Michael students primarily have made use of the same concepts introduced to the original Michael group. However, you have introduced many topics in the last 40+ years, and your Teaching ranges far beyond what you began to teach that original group. ...

 

If you were starting today to deliver an overview of your Teaching and your Personality System through mechanisms and media that are now available, would you change the sequence in which you would deliver concepts? Would you include topics delivered more recently that were barely mentioned or not covered at all with the original group?

 

MEntity: 

Our teaching has to be received organically and natural to the contexts of those receiving it. This means that we cannot have a specific agenda for what and when details are delivered. ... Your current time and context have limitations and demands and contexts that shape the range of exploration of our teaching, and this will continue to expand over time.

 

That being said, if we were only coming through for the first time to speak to students existing in this time frame, our focus would be on some version of Soul Ages.

 

We would elaborate upon the reality of Soul Ages and encourage these to be associated with stages of an individual life as correlations to individual and collective behaviors.  Babies "act like" babies. Young Souls act like teens. Mature Souls act like "adults." Etc.

 

We would focus on the Internal Monads, as well.

 

Understanding the stages of Soul Ages and the stages of Internal Monads is a micro/macro cosmic exploration of collective consciousness, which is where the emphasis from all directions will come over the next 50 years. 

 

Understanding each other is vital to the progression of collective evolution of acceptance."

 

[Maureen]

4 hours ago, Janet said:

That being said, if we were only coming through for the first time to speak to students existing in this time frame, our focus would be on some version of Soul Ages.

 

We would elaborate upon the reality of Soul Ages and encourage these to be associated with stages of an individual life as correlations to individual and collective behaviors.  Babies "act like" babies. Young Souls act like teens. Mature Souls act like "adults." Etc.

 

We would focus on the Internal Monads, as well.

 

Understanding the stages of Soul Ages and the stages of Internal Monads is a micro/macro cosmic exploration of collective consciousness, which is where the emphasis from all directions will come over the next 50 years. 

 

Understanding each other is vital to the progression of collective evolution of acceptance."

AHA!! This is really interesting. When I teach someone about the Michael Teachings these are the prongs I go in on. Internal Monads and Soul Ages. I have no preconceived idea beforehand — it’s just what comes up in the moment. It’s what I think, most of the time, will make sense to the person. It seems a lot more relevant than getting into Roles, etc., which is a lot like teaching astrology through Sun Signs rather than through evolving life experiences. The last time I had this type of AHA was when I realized that a full blown teaching idea I had of using the negative pole / positive pole “zipper” metaphor had come, “out of the blue”, from Michael. That’s when I fully comprehended how seamlessly their teaching moves through me. I’m still blown away. It’s truly humbling and awesome how everything fits together. Order… Beauty… Energy.

 

[Cheryl Varner]

I find that knowing the soul age and roles of my children has greatly helped me understand them.

 

  My youngest is a 4 mature  warrior cast priest and my oldest is a 6th mature server cast artisan.  My oldest is also a pisces and I sort of hone in on that when I talk to her.  She, like me, loves her solitude.  I've talked to her about being an artisan and the five levels of input.  More importantly, it has helped me understand her need to be alone.  I've explained a bit about being an artisan; but the important piece to me is that I understand her need to be alone and I don't push.  Conversely, my son, the warrior cast priest is much more the people person, understandably.  He has lots of friends, belongs to a big and close family on his paternal line. You do not want to be the focus of his temper.

 

Neither of them is interested in the teaching; but I understand them better and myself since I know role, soul age etc. It's not necessary to know or understand all of the teaching.  Is that even possible?  Go with what interests you and see if it doesn't help you understand those around you - and yourself.

 

I am an ex-nun, ex Catholic....when I left the  church it took me a few years to find the Michael teachings and those in-between years were difficult.   When I was given MFM, my life and the world around me started to make sense.

 

Peace, 

Old warrior