Jump to content

20160716 MMW: The Health Of Your Emotional Center


Recommended Posts

Rosario

Wonderful exploration from all of you... 
I liked this:
 

2 hours ago, Bobby said:

Love is the fuel of universes, but if you would like to experience this while in a body, you must allow your other Centers to do their work. 

 

2 hours ago, Bobby said:

When the Emotional Center is opened to recognize that there is a soul in another person, even in the most despicable of people and even in those who seek to harm you, Essence Recognition is the only way that there will be evolution beyond. 

 

"Saying something", I relate with that one, @Bobby.  I guess you'll never find out if they want to hear you, if you keep it for yourself. And someone may be in need of it, too :)
@PeterK, "cutting out the bullshit" how badass! And yes, our contextual "truths" prompted by emotions are fine, but Truth has many other facets and is far from conclusive. 

The turbulence reminded me of my family situation right now, @Maureen. It can get soap-opera like to stratospheric levels...but then I remember I'm the captain in command...at least of my own choices :)

@Troy,I've been reading your heartfelt posts on FB... what a gift of communication you have!  Cutting through the bullshit is something you've been doing really well ...however, "remember the good"  is something I too would tell you ;-) Hugs for you...champion of freedom and equality! ♥ 

 

  • LIKE/LOVE 14
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • PRIEST
Maureen

This was a very interesting session. I’m still thinking on this, but just to be clear, although I may "love turbulence" (as Michael put it) I deeply loathe drama, and all that goes with it, because what sits at the heart of drama is bullshit. I'm for getting at/to the truth of whatever the matter is and helping others and myself to change. Drama is about the denial of truth and it depends on people being willing to churn the same shit over and over again. I’m not willing to do that.

The turbulence they’re speaking about (with me) is all about change, real change. As Michael said, "We use the term "turbulence" here because you know that when you fly there is turbulence. Change brings turbulence. Turbulence means things are moving. Turbulence shakes things up and while it can be scary, jolting, shocking, and even damaging, it is part of the process of flying together. "

I’m reminded of a few patterns (which I’m still thinking on ...my head had a mini-explosion) but one that jumped out was when Michael told me about my history with them. From an OMW on July 19, 2014:

MEntity:  It took us a while to figure out what would calm Maureen.

Actual contact, animals, new things, were interesting enough, but it was not until we thought to point upward that the calm could come.

We thought it was the sky, the stars, that became her source of calm, but what we would discover long after these incarnations was that it was the first realization of Time passing that was the key.

The patterns, the movements of stars, the changing of weather, etc. Our pointing up somehow got this concept moving in her in a way that would be explored over many lifetimes from there.

All of the various ways Time can be observed, understood, or measured would evolve over time and be explored, but at the root of all of it was this fascination that things changed.

Her calm came from a vague realization that what she saw as static redundancy suddenly had potential.

More to come later….  :Zap:

  • LIKE/LOVE 22
Link to post
Share on other sites
MichaelS

This is wonderful. I think(??) I can validate the dance between Sentimentality and Perception and Trust/Rejection, as it's something I've been thinking about for the last year or so, albeit in a limited way. I have become aware of my willingness to attribute negative feelings to symbols around me. I called it 'Timeposting'. For want of a better word, but Michael's terminology is better.

 

Timeposting is is where I perceive a particular symbol to have a negative meaning and I freely allow seeing that symbol to inform my negative feelings. I'm driving to work and I pass a landmark and I realise that I have attributed meaning to that landmark. I become locked in time, bypassing logic. 'Oh no! It's the Pleasure Beach! That means I'm on my way to another negative experience. I wish I was driving past it on the other side of the road, cos then it means I'm leaving it behind!' I'm allowing my experiences (and the symbols I attribute to those experiences) to determine my feelings. When it is the other way round! My feelings will always determine my experiences. Why not lay alongside those negative expectations, some positive ones? Why not joyfully enter into the dance of a new day/experiences/opportunities?

 

Thanks to all for posting this session, it's come at a great time for me. I will enjoy working thru the transcript and developing a clearer understanding of how I/we allow experience to determine my/our feelings. This misunderstanding can be very painful. 

Edited by MikeS
  • LIKE/LOVE 15
Link to post
Share on other sites
MichaelS
2 hours ago, DianeHB said:

I've observed the conflict caused by equating symbol with meaning to be the core of many Mature-soul relationship dramas. So much so that that is how I pick up on Mature-soulness most of the time. What I mean is when someone insists that "if you don't remember my birthday, you must not love me enough." Or not speaking to a family member because they didn't attend your baby shower. Or calling someone out for cancelling a date a year later...in front of their significant other (this happened to Tex). In Mature soul conflicts you tend to hear, over and over, "if you did X, you MUST mean Y." Old souls (that are manifesting Old) tend to be able to see past that, at least in relationships with other people (but not necessarily in relationships with themselves). 

Yes. Very much so. I am particularly vulnerable to this misunderstanding in my relationship with self. It's somewhere in the equation of my 'self loathing'.

Edited by MikeS
  • LIKE/LOVE 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
ckaricai
5 hours ago, DianeHB said:

I've observed the conflict caused by equating symbol with meaning to be the core of many Mature-soul relationship dramas. So much so that that is how I pick up on Mature-soulness most of the time. What I mean is when someone insists that "if you don't remember my birthday, you must not love me enough." Or not speaking to a family member because they didn't attend your baby shower. Or calling someone out for cancelling a date a year later...in front of their significant other (this happened to Tex). In Mature soul conflicts you tend to hear, over and over, "if you did X, you MUST mean Y." Old souls (that are manifesting Old) tend to be able to see past that, at least in relationships with other people (but not necessarily in relationships with themselves). 

 

Thanks for these examples. I just wasn't clear what they meant by symbols. How are we supposed to figure out what our symbols are? What meaning are we supposed to be inscribing the symbols to? It was confusing but I think I kind of understand now, tho I still couldn't say what my symbols are for various meanings. It's not something I've ever thought about.

  • LIKE/LOVE 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
BrianW
9 hours ago, DianeHB said:

I've observed the conflict caused by equating symbol with meaning to be the core of many Mature-soul relationship dramas. So much so that that is how I pick up on Mature-soulness most of the time. What I mean is when someone insists that "if you don't remember my birthday, you must not love me enough." Or not speaking to a family member because they didn't attend your baby shower. Or calling someone out for cancelling a date a year later...in front of their significant other (this happened to Tex). In Mature soul conflicts you tend to hear, over and over, "if you did X, you MUST mean Y." Old souls (that are manifesting Old) tend to be able to see past that, at least in relationships with other people (but not necessarily in relationships with themselves). 

 

Diane, I never thought of it this way, but thank you for giving some really good examples of it. I see it a lot in myself with my interactions with others. 

  • LIKE/LOVE 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
BrianW
3 hours ago, ckaricai said:

 

Thanks for these examples. I just wasn't clear what they meant by symbols. How are we supposed to figure out what our symbols are? What meaning are we supposed to be inscribing the symbols to? It was confusing but I think I kind of understand now, tho I still couldn't say what my symbols are for various meanings. It's not something I've ever thought about.

 

One example that came to mind for me was a song. A song itself is neutral. But, depending on an event that may have occurred the last time you heard or sang that song, you might immediately love the song, immediately hate the song and change it, be somewhere in-between those two extremes, or are completely neutral to it. The song becomes a symbol of that memory and it can trigger an emotional response.

  • LIKE/LOVE 11
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • HOST & RESIDENT CHANNEL
Troy

@ckaricai Michael has talked about "symbols" a lot. They can be useful, but when we become attached to them, they can be troublesome at best. I don't think there is a set of symbols that could be identified like a chart, but I've never really asked. That might be something I check out with Michael. But what I know they mean in general is that anything you decide "means something" is a symbol. Diane gave some good examples. There are always symbols involved when we have an "If this, then that" equation going on.

 

Other symbols are more important and intimate and the line between symbol and meaning is really difficult to overcome. This happens a lot when we fall in love and then break up. Rather than allow the love to be its own thing, it's attached to the symbol of the relationship and the other person. We don't always know how to let the truth and experience of love exist without the symbols. Or when someone dies, we rightfully mourn the loss of that person, but the truth and love of that relationship continues between the Essences, even if the symbols are gone.  

 

Other symbols might be "money is power" or "knowledge is power" or "being rich is evil" or "being White means ignorance" or "being Black means poverty and violence" or "being Asian means smart" or "a police officer means I am safe." All of our prejudices are symbols.

 

So if you want to figure out your symbols, all you have to do is look around and you'll see your life full of symbols. Having symbols isn't the problem, but if we grow too attached to them and forget the core energy/essence that's represented by the symbols, we can spiral into all kinds of issues.

  • LIKE/LOVE 18
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • PRIEST
Maureen

Cary, I believe both attachment and the act of detachment is part of the longer arc that moves us towards non-attachment. Attachment and detachment is where we find our symbols. Non-attachment is where we find meaning through a greater perception and the reconciliation of paradoxes. It’s where the fullness of Truth, Love and Energy resides with our ever-expanding consciousness. Consciousness gives meaning its’ breath.

I love the following description Michael gave on the spectrum between poles and the arcing that joins them, supersedes them, and then envelopes the whole equation with a sum of consciousness that is greater than all its’ parts ...polarized or otherwise. It's a great "visual aid".

Question:  I’ve just started recognizing the differences in intensity and extremes between different soul ages and different internal monadal experiences as an effect on how Chief Features display. Is this true for all of the various overleaves — i.e., even frequencies and energies? As a general rule, is the slide between negative and positive poles less dramatic with age and experience?

MEntity:  Your observation is valid. What you describe is the spectrum of perspectives, experiences, and comprehensions that range between the poles. As the soul grows older, it moves from a more reactionary bounce between the poles, into a response-oriented pendulum swing between the poles, and then into what might be best visualized as an arc between the poles. This arcing is what could be said to be the “Third Perspective.” The older soul still has access to the range between the poles, but from a third perspective, or a perspective that is more “outside” of the self, from a higher elevation, an arc. This allows for a non-attachment to the experiences, comprehensions, and perspectives, while still participating in them.

The evolution through the use of the spectrum between the poles of overleaves then could be described as a progression from attachment to detachment to non-attachment, or reactionary to responsive to True Choice, or from bouncing to swinging to arcing.

 

Levitating Consciousness.jpg

Edited by Maureen
  • LIKE/LOVE 15
Link to post
Share on other sites
Christian

For some reason, the concept of a library of symbols prompted a vision of a bag being opened and thousands of disks with different designs on them.   I felt like a kid finding some secret treasure but had no clue what it "means". 

  • LIKE/LOVE 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
ckaricai

Thanks everyone for trying to explain this to me. I think I just don't have the mental space right now to parse this out so for the time being this symbol business is all a confusing abstraction for me. 

  • LIKE/LOVE 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
PPLD
18 hours ago, Christian said:

For some reason, the concept of a library of symbols prompted a vision of a bag being opened and thousands of disks with different designs on them.   I felt like a kid finding some secret treasure but had no clue what it "means". 

 

The first thought when I read your comment was "Mmm... could it be my fellow Scholar?". But I see that you are Scholar cast :happy:.

 

I naturally do not know what your vision "means" to you, but I strongly resonate with the mechanism of a concept I am reviewing/trying out/seeking to integrate, being instantly translated to a very clear picture/vision. 

 

Thanks for sharing @Christian!

 

Your explanation of attachment/detachment/non-attachment @Maureen is spot-on for me. Being an Emotionally Centred Scholar, gaining mastery and true insight in regard to how I work with my symbols, is very interesting for me indeed; my inherent neutrality can very easily be used to establish detachment. In that, it can become an insidious "safe place" of simply not dealing with still remaining attachments. That naturally is connected to the - hm... how should I put it? - to the subtlety of the symbol. I have observed in myself that a stable position of non-attachment was fairly easy to establish in regard to the more obvious symbols of e.g. societal imprints. But that "easiness" is not consistent and varies with how personal the symbol is. The challenge in love and grief that you describe @Troy is definitely a valid example.

 

So I'd say that the closer the symbol to the Personality's fears, needs of protection and defences, the more intricate the process of reaching non-attachment or even identifying the symbol.

 

I have never thought about it this way, but reviewing myself in light of this discussion shows me that this attachment/detachment/non-attachment dance has definitely been one of the prioritised aspects in my life.

Edited by PPLD
  • LIKE/LOVE 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • HOST & RESIDENT CHANNEL
Troy

@ckaricaiI think you may be overshooting the concept somehow. 

 

Let's say you are wishing for something... something like "I wish for a better life." Everything that means "better" to you is a symbol. It's how you've decided you will know if your life is better. But if we aren't flexible with our symbols, then as your life gets better, if the "better" that shows up is different from your set of predetermined symbols, you may completely miss that your life is getting better, or reject everything that comes along that isn't your limited idea of "better."

 

If that's still confusing and the concept of symbols is confusing, then just replace "symbols" with "Prejudices." That's a good place to start. Your Prejudices are where you've hooked predetermined meaning into a person, place, or thing because of personal experiences or lack of experiences.

 

 

 

  • LIKE/LOVE 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
ckaricai
21 hours ago, Troy said:

@ckaricaiI think you may be overshooting the concept somehow. 

 

Let's say you are wishing for something... something like "I wish for a better life." Everything that means "better" to you is a symbol. It's how you've decided you will know if your life is better. But if we aren't flexible with our symbols, then as your life gets better, if the "better" that shows up is different from your set of predetermined symbols, you may completely miss that your life is getting better, or reject everything that comes along that isn't your limited idea of "better."

 

If that's still confusing and the concept of symbols is confusing, then just replace "symbols" with "Prejudices." That's a good place to start. Your Prejudices are where you've hooked predetermined meaning into a person, place, or thing because of personal experiences or lack of experiences.

 

 

 

 

But I've reread this channeling a few times and I just am not relating to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • HOST & RESIDENT CHANNEL
Troy
2 hours ago, ckaricai said:

 

But I've reread this channeling a few times and I just am not relating to it.

 

Since I don't know which part, or why, I don't know how to respond, but if you have any questions, I'll see if I can help. I thought you were just talking about the concept of being attached to symbols. I misunderstood.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • PRIEST
Maureen

 

Cary, the only thing I can add (that may or may not help) is to look at how many people will say assumptive things about people, in general, like: You can't trust "Scorpios", or I don't like (Michael Teachings) "Priests", or You know ...how "men" are, or alternatively "Women" are so (fill in the blank) _______, "Blondes" are dimwits, etc, etc., 

 

I could go on and on....

 

All those comments are symbols and do not address or get close to the meaning or the Essence of the person (in these examples) or "whatever". A symbols sits on the outside making assessments based on assumption, experience to date, anecdotal information, superficialities. Meaning goes to the core and speaks from there.

 

Edited by Maureen
  • LIKE/LOVE 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
ckaricai
On July 20, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Troy said:

Since I don't know which part, or why, I don't know how to respond, but if you have any questions, I'll see if I can help. I thought you were just talking about the concept of being attached to symbols. I misunderstood.

You understood. It's just that in addition to having a problem with the wording of the concept Michael is trying to convey, I also find the essence of the message to be kind of trite: to maintain the health of your emotional center don't worry, be happy or don't worry, find happy. Really? That's the message? I could have gotten that from a Snapple cap. I'm not saying everything they say needs to be profound and esoteric, but just not trite.

 

And if that is not the message then I'm really misunderstanding it which means I'm having trouble relating to this particular material. 

Edited by ckaricai
  • LIKE/LOVE 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Maxim [memorial profile]

Cary, I've struggled with things that were apparently not an issue for "everyone" else.  Sometimes the best thing you can do is let it go and come back later.... day, a month, a year.... and voila it all falls into place.  Good luck.

  • LIKE/LOVE 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
Nick Sweeney (Babylove)

Ckaricai, you made me laugh cuz I use "i'm over it" quite a bit. Lol

 

I think you hit the nail on the head.  Everything IS a symbol in our personal and subjective realities.  That's just how we function in the physical plane (perhaps the Astral, too?).  To get at it better-everything is its own thing, its own essence and meaning, aside from what meaning we may give it.  But the way we relate is by giving things/objects/people, the meaning it has FOR US.

 

Everything is a symbol to us, and our work is in learning how to comprehend the essence of everything and not just relating to the meaning we give everything.

 

Lol I hope this didn'the make you more "over it!"?????

 

 

  • LIKE/LOVE 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
Nick Sweeney (Babylove)
2 hours ago, ckaricai said:

You understood. It's just that in addition to having a problem with the wording of the concept Michael is trying to convey, I also find the essence of the message to be kind of trite: to maintain the health of your emotional center don't worry, be happy or don't worry, find happy. Really? That's the message? I could have gotten that from a Snapple cap. I'm not saying everything they say needs to be profound and esoteric, but just not trite.

 

And if that is not the message then I'm really misunderstanding it which means I'm having trouble relating to this particular material. 

Also, I don't think Michael's message is "don't worry, be happy/don't worry, find happy."

 

I think they are saying that when we are in the negative pole of the emotional center, we lose the flexibility and adaptability of allowing our symbols to be updated...of allowing the meaning to be the same, but for the symbols to be updated.  This is sentimentality.  We are attached to our symbols.

 

Symbols of what "love" looks like, for example.

 

And when we are in the positive pole, we are in PERCEPTION.  We "see" beyond our symbols and are able to let the forms and symbols change in order to reflect the essence and meaning.

 

An example from my own life are all of the symbols I used to have for what a "good relationship" would look like.  At a certain time in my life (not too long ago!), the symbols looked like: a man between the ages of 25yo and 45yo, crazy-wonderful sexual chemistry, a "spiritual man," etc.

 

Now, with my partner, Jorg, we would not even be together, if I had been attached to those symbols of what a good relationship would be.

 

lol that seems funny

 

But when we met, he was 50yo.

 

Our sexual chemistry WAS crazy-wonderful in the beginning.  But now we've been together over 3 years, and it has changed.  Still great, just different...and I wouldn't describe it as that crazy-wonderful image/symbol I had in my head years ago.

 

And he certainly would not describe himself as a spiritual man!  He is oh-so not into spirituality or philosophy...quite literal and German?  And I would not describe him that way.

 

And yet, this is the most whole and wonderful long-term relationship I have ever had.  It is in many ways perfect...for me.

 

But I had to allow for the symbols I had of what a good relationship or boyfriend would look like to change.

 

I hope this is helpful.

  • LIKE/LOVE 15
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • HOST & RESIDENT CHANNEL
Troy

LOL @ckaricai Michael never said anything about "don't worry, be happy." Where did you get that idea? That never even occurred to me. But it's actually not a bad concept, however trite it might seem. Truths are usually that clear and simple.

 

And why would the idea that we interpret everything around us subjectively be such a radical idea that is "too much"? I'm just curious to understand where you were coming from there.

 

The irony is that Michael was pointing to the fact that "happy" doesn't always mean what we have attached to what it means to be "happy." They were pointing to the fact that we get attached to certain ideas (symbols) of what it means to be happy or what conditions have to be in place to be happy, but being happy can be included in and include even the worst of situations because "being happy" is bigger than our feelings. Being happy includes using our understanding, using our trust, using our perceptions, and being responsible for expanding or being more flexible in our interpretations/meaning of symbols. They were speaking to our getting past our attachments to what it means to "be happy," and they did say that choosing trust is more useful than worrying (which they describe as one of the most useless states), but that was to help expand our range of choice, not to just command that we "don't worry/be happy." 

 

Also, I'm glad you understood what Nicholas had to say. It was pretty much what everyone else was saying, but sometimes the timing or the wording finally gets through.
 

I want to say that if I sound a bit defensive, please forgive my tone. I'm probably being a bit defensive after reading your comments. I just feel I now have to make it clear (based on your responses) that my reaching out to help wasn't to push anything onto you or defend Michael (or myself). You asked for help in understanding so I reached out, as did several others. To say "I'm way ahead of you. Kinda over it," makes me concerned that you felt pressure to accept something you had already decided against or that we were wasting your time and our time. If you express confusion or questioning in the future, should we respond or should we leave it alone? I love these kinds of discussions and I live for them, so I take the questions seriously, but if they are rhetorical, I'd rather know that so I don't overstep.

  • LIKE/LOVE 7
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
×
×
  • Create New...