I AM The Way I AM . . .

Hi Daz,
In terms of our core changing I think your example of an orange is excellent. However I see the evolution of the orange in a different way. You see an orange starts off on the tree as a small green, sour thing. Yes - the segments are there, but the seeds within have not developed and nor have the segments made up into big juicy, sweet sections. As the orange develops it changes, it is still the same orange, but the 'experiences' of time change it, and finally it will emerge as a fully ripe orange with mature seeds encased within. We are no different in a way, except our maturing takes many lifetimes and many experiences of all kinds.


Hi Paul,
There has been a lot of research done on how past traumatic experiences continue to affect us, it seems you choose to be blind to it. Post traumatic stress syndrome is a popular one, but the effects of abortion, child abuse and near death experiences are others. These scars exist in the present, and they have been worked on extensively. They do not fit into your litany that tries to make them non-existent, so you just continually repeat that they do not exist - have you considered how this makes many who carry these scars feel? They live with them every minute of every day until they learn to heal them. They can choose to heal them, and will do so when they are ready, but to suggest that they are at fault for not doing so at the pace that suits you or that you have achieved is just self-absorbed.

I agree that there are some who can make money from a very low start, but by quoting the exceptional exception you appear to lay blame on each individual, and yet in many countries the best some can mange is just to stay alive and support as best their family survival. Placing the blame for their poverty on them is just uncaring, uncharitable and unkind.

People react differently to different medicines, this is mostly based on physiology, often going back to genetic backgrounds. Even so the fact that one person may not behave like that does not make it a choice, it just means that a few in the population are built differently. Will you ever understand and accept that we are not all the same? This again just shows a lack of understanding of the complexity that makes up a person, and a zero tolerance attitude.

Finally if what you say about children emulating those around them and so developing their core being then twins would always be the same, and yet they are not, siblings would always be the same, and yet they are not, and people would never find the change within that allows them to become more than they were. Even so you confuse child learning with core nature, and so the example you quote provides no evidence of arriving completely blank, you continue to quote this but give no evidence of it in the face of compelling evidence from children who remember past lives place and names that they could never have gathered during their childhood, and (more open to interpretation) evidence of past life recall through journeying or hypnosis. So where is the evidence?
Furthermore to be wiped clean denies the possibility of remaining as an individual after we die, something you seen to suggest happens, this kind of 'death' caused by wiping is a way of expunging the individual, it resets the balance of the changes made without any way to cover the cost of the balancing, it is an attempt at losing any responsibility for ones actions and ones life, it seemingly allows any action to be ok, any response to carry no changes with it, and this is not the case, for in every system there must always be an eventual balancing. We are responsible for the things we do, we balance what we do with the cost to ourselves and others, and it is only an evasion to believe that our actions carry no cost or consequence.


When we die we carry everything back with us, all of our experiences for how could we expunge any? They happened and are part of our existence. We are changed and so we are different to the spirit that we were, this is part of our journey. We remain individuals within 'the oneness' and will return at some stage to learn different things and progress our evolution.

We do not require eyes to see light, light is energy and it can be perceived in many different ways, and a being of energy will be able to perceive energy if only by the harmonic changes it effects in ones own system so you are correct, an absence of eyes does not make it dark. This is also true of perceiving other's energy, and this lies at the heart of the word love, for love comes about when two energy forms interact in a harmonious way (as in 'in harmony' energetically). When this happens a resonance occurs and this connecting in harmony allows a joining. It does not just happen between people, for the earth has its own energy, as do all things. This is part of what stops us from being 'just a separate being' in this world and when we die, we are connected and can never be separate because of that (those) connection(s).

Saying that our time here (an alternative reality whatever that is) is based on illusion is just pseudoscience dressed up to sound truthful, if there is any substance in the claim that this is an alternative reality, or that it is an illusion then it is time to explain, or else it just becomes a fantasy disguised to bolster an incorrect viewpoint.
Furthermore to say that we should just get on and enjoy the experience we have afforded ourselves is self-indulgent and infantile. We are here to learn and while we may enjoy some experiences some are always going to be hard lessons - for that is the nature of life on earth, all part of the balance. We learn a lot thorough suffering, more than we learn form a life of ease, we challenge ourselves more when we are sick than when we are healthy, and we only realise our strength when we have need of it. We should aim to make the most of each life that we can.
love
chris

There has been a lot of research done on how past traumatic experiences continue to affect us, it seems you choose to be blind to it. Post traumatic stress syndrome is a popular one, but the effects of abortion, child abuse and near death experiences are others. These scars exist in the present, and they have been worked on extensively. They do not fit into your litany that tries to make them non-existent, so you just continually repeat that they do not exist - have you considered how this makes many who carry these scars feel? They live with them every minute of every day until they learn to heal them. They can choose to heal them, and will do so when they are ready, but to suggest that they are at fault for not doing so at the pace that suits you or that you have achieved is just self-absorbed.

I agree that there are some who can make money from a very low start, but by quoting the exceptional exception you appear to lay blame on each individual, and yet in many countries the best some can mange is just to stay alive and support as best their family survival. Placing the blame for their poverty on them is just uncaring, uncharitable and unkind.

Chris,

Is it not unkind of you to pass judgement on Paul in such ways? You say things such as "you choose to be blind to it", "is just self-absorbed", "uncaring, uncharitable and unkind". From what I have read, Paul is simply stating his understanding of things, and you seem (yet again, as I have read similar responses on other threads) to be dissecting everything Paul says and judging him as wrong under your own beliefs. I certainly think you could discuss things without such judgement, if you chose to.

I've followed most of what's written in this thread, and you seem to consistently overlook the point that Paul is making (and he made in other threads to you). We do have choices!

If, at this precise moment in time, I took any person and placed two cards in front of them, one saying "I choose to be happy, positive etc." and the other saying "I choose to be unhappy, angry etc." and asked them to pick one, how many people would really honestly choose the latter card? How many people do you know who would choose to be unhappy, angry etc. over being happy and positive etc.? The opportunities for a person to act to achieve a great level of happiness etc. may be great or they may be very limited, as their social standing may dictate, but that doesn't mean that at any single point in time, they cannot choose to seek the positive over the negative. Everyone has that choice, and this has been seen in many great people, the first I can think of as an example, is Terry Waite who for a long time wasn't able to act to change his situation, but many times during his captivity made that choice to be positive and eventually things changed for him.

Paul isn't saying that we should ignore the fact that people have suffered in the past; he isn't being unkind; he isn't ignoring the fact that these things are terrible and shouldn't happen; he IS saying though that if people choose the positive card over the negative then they can make that choice at any time they wish, so why not Now! in the present moment and every present moment thereafter.

All Love and Reiki Hugs

Hi Chris

There has been a lot of research done on how past traumatic experiences continue to affect us, it seems you choose to be blind to it.

The research is into past events, so it focuses its research upon past events, if the research had come up with an effective way of transforming the present by focusing upon the past, then we would be using it.

We have a different approach which works within the now to transform what is actually being created within the fullness of self right now in real time within each person, we cannot address something within someone what does not exist right now as there is nothing to work with.

Saying that our time here (an alternative reality whatever that is) is based on illusion is just pseudoscience dressed up to sound truthful, if there is any substance in the claim that this is an alternative reality, or that it is an illusion then it is time to explain, or else it just becomes a fantasy disguised to bolster an incorrect viewpoint.

Do you think that you take your body back with you and bring it round again? if not then this is an alternative reality to our natural state of being!

On your points about responsibilities.

Our core personal development teachings revolve around everyone being responsible for their own thoughts and actions,, when people choose to become responsible for self and learn to embrace self in an open and non-judgemental way by let go of judgements, they become one with self and become free to choose another way of being for themselves.

Hi Energylz,
I have examined everything I see and believe, looked at things others say with an open mind and tried to sift the true from the false, the proven from the unproven, and I will continue to do so. So when someone makes a statement, one that is stated as fact and not just opinion or speculation it needs to be backed up by some kind of logic or proof - the alternative is that we live in a world filled with misrepresentation and smoke and mirrors. So when someone states something I ask if there is proof. If there is no proof, if it is just a belief (and I have many of those) then that is ok, but it does not make it a fact and it should not be put across as a fact. You see, this stuff really matters, for if we cannot seek the truth, find the evidence, no one will, for science dismisses it as bogus, and all of us along with it. So if I come across as unkind I apologise, but it is important we seek the truth or else we gain nothing.
There are many new modalities and forms of healing being constructed all the time, I do not doubt that Paul's has some good results (he has said so), but in order to see how it works, not just that it does, means that it has to be based on a structure - and I'm interested in the structure - but some of it by way of Paul's explanation does not seem to have been factualised - and this detracts from the underlying process.

In terms of choices I think you are right, most people would choose the easy road - it seems an obvious choice, but that does not make it the right choice (though it may be in some cases). It is an easy choice to remain silent in the face of aggression, many have done so through many wars, it is an easy choice to agree with a crowd when one knows that disagreement will bring repercussions, Jesus showed that the easy choice was not the right choice, it is an easy choice to opt for jam today, but that may mean starvation tomorrow. Sometimes it takes a long time to realise the beneficial legacy that suffering brings, look how many people end up helping others when they have gone through a bereavement or some traumatic experience. Being happy does not depend upon an easy life, or a lack of suffering, or on good health, it is a state of mind and can be found anywhere. Opting for the seemingly positive card Now therefore is not always the 'best option' and sometimes only time and experience will make it clear why. The use of the phrase 'self-serving' therefore needs to be carefully done, for self-serving has no reference to time spans - and if one applies a hurry-up in order to make it happen in the now it may well be that the wrong choice is made.

Take for instance Terry Waite (your example), his experience was traumatic, and he did a great job of surviving it. He was (and still is) a man who (I think) seeks to help others. His experience opened up a way for him to help many more people, in a far different way than he might ever have been able to had he not gone through his experience - it may take time for this to become manifest, but it is often the way of things.

So I understand what Paul is saying, but it is equally true, and there are plenty of examples, where the process of dealing with issues that seem to cause ongoing suffering needs to be endured until the process is complete, only then can the issue be healed and leave the person healed rather than the symptoms treated. Perhaps this is the choice people make, perhaps that is in their best interest, and yet the idea of placing the 'easy card' in front of them is beguiling. If it is chosen the person will perhaps never have the opportunity to deal with the issues to completion, and so never realise the long term legacy that their suffering allows.

Now - when you use the words positive and negative this is what I understand, that you apply what you think is the meaning of these things (you judge for them), by choosing Now you decide that this is the best time for them. However I see that there are choices, and that when people are ready to make those choices they will, if they choose to 'procrastinate' then that is right for them, and although it may not seem to make sense at the time it will eventually. The real question therefore is not 'why not Now?' as you put it, but 'is this the right time?' or even 'why Now?', and yes I do think that Paul has discussed clients in a way that does make them debased, and yes I will stand up and defend them, if that makes me sound unkind then so be it, it is not right to talk of clients as if they are less important than the healer and as if they may waste the healer's time.

Hi Paul,
I think that the research does evaluate what is happening in the Now to the person from those past events. It seeks to understand the threads that remain and still affect the behaviour in the now of the person. Certainly there is some investigation into the original (past) event, it is important to understand the trigger that started the effects that remain, it may give clues to the treatment needed, but it is the person's current situation that is researched. So these things do exist in the person now, not the original event, I agree that is gone, but the results are present now. By denying their existence the chance to face them and heal them is lost.

As I see it there is only one reality, we exist sometimes in 'another place, as energetic beings, sometimes on earth as energetic beings in physical bodies, but it is all connected, all one and any perceived separation is illusory.

love
chris

Chris,

I never said anything about taking the "easy road", that is your own interpretation (and misunderstanding I have to say) of what I said, and the practice of living in the present moment.

From what you are saying, as an example, a person who has suffered terrible trauma as a child, and who is suffering now because of their attachment to that past trauma, should choose to carry on suffering as if that will somehow help them in the present moment and in the future. That is just wrong. I know from personal experience (knowledge as it has been put into practice and proven) that the truth is to choose to live in the present moment and act on what is here right in front of us now. Living with the suffering of a past trauma does nothing but distract us from the needs of the present moment (e.g. how many people have car accidents because they've driven off in a fury after an argument and their playing it all out in their mind rather than being in the present moment and acting as needed for their driving). Living in the present moment and choosing to end the suffering in the Now, doesn't mean forgetting what happened in the past; it's not a case of the "easy" or "hard" road, as those quantifications have nothing to do with it, they're just judgements of the mind. The knowledge of experience from the past can be used in the present moment if there are valuable things learnt from it, but letting that thing from the past cause suffering in the present, has absolutely zero benefit. That is what all the gurus, wise teachers and practitioners of buddhism etc. have practiced throughout history, and it's lasted to the present day exactly because it is proven to be the truth.

Yes, people like Terry Waite have gone on to help others since their suffering, but how many of them bring that suffering with them, and live it in what they are doing Now?

I'm not saying that suffering doesn't happen. And I'm certainly not saying, as you completely misinterpreted, that someone who is presently in the act of suffering should just shut up and be silent about it. But even someone suffering at this very moment can make a choice of living with the suffering or choosing to act in whatever way possible, however small that act may be, to meet the needs of the moment and hopefully find the path that leads them out of the situation that is causing the suffering. Nobody says it's easy to do that, but at any given point of time, there is always the choice... suffer in the mind... or act on what is present in front of you Now!

As we've mentioned before on other threads, Paul's knowledge of BEing in the Now, isn't a belief, it's something that is knowledge through having put it into practice (and I know this to be true from my own practice and experience), and that is what Paul bases his healing modality around. It's not something that can be simply put down in 10 simple steps of an instruction manual, it's something that takes different amounts of time for each person, to understand a framework of terminolgy so that they can put things into practice for themselves and know what is truth and what is something their mind is creating and they are attaching to, that they no longer need. You keep going on about it being Pauls "Belief", and that it needs scientific proof, but even science needs scientific proof for a lot of it's own things and they can't do that. Science (or some of it) believes in superstrings, but there's no "proof" of these, they are just a theoretical concept, yet science doesn't shoot itself down for this belief; Science believes in Electrons, but nobody has ever seen one, only the effects of what they call an electron. Science is just another belief system like many others, but one that has gained a lot of clout in the world. Even your own description that we carry suffering from past lives and that we are here to learn through suffering is a belief. You say you have proof of this, but the proof of these things, such as the children with memories of people and places they haven't been to, wouldn't stand up in a scientific court. There's no double blind testing of these things, and there's no proof that these children haven't learnt these details from elsewhere, it's all belief based on trusting the word of some people. The only way you could know this to be true, without any doubt, would be if you personally experienced this for yourself and could eliminate all other possibilities without reservation. Past life regression... I've been there, done that... very interesting, but still there's no proof behind it. That's not to say I don't understand how energy can carry on after our physical body dies and that energy perhaps intertwine with the energy of another physical body in the universe at some other time, but certainly the belief that we are here to learn lessons and then return and judge ourselves afterwards and then choose another life etc. etc. is a particular field of spiritual belief that has no scientific grounding to it. That doesn't mean it's not possible, but it's not something I can scientifically say that I have direct knowledge of from personal experience and practice. Everything I have experienced I can explain through other means.

So, Paul, and myself speak of these things as facts, because we have personal experience of them from putting them into practice. That's the evidence that tells us it is true. We don't believe them... we know them. We certainly can't make you know them, we can only share what we know and then you can test it for yourself if you choose. Maybe though, you'd prefer to choose the "hard road"?

All Love and Reiki Hugs

Hi Chris

Glad to hear you understand the concept of alternative realities, the main difference in the way we understand it is summed up in the meaning of the two words 'spirit' and 'consciousness'. 🙂

I think that the research does evaluate what is happening in the Now to the person from those past events. It seeks to understand the threads that remain and still affect the behaviour in the now of the person.

Certainly there is some investigation into the original (past) event, it is important to understand the trigger that started the effects that remain, it may give clues to the treatment needed, but it is the person's current situation that is researched. So these things do exist in the person now, not the original event, I agree that is gone, but the results are present now. By denying their existence the chance to face them and heal them is lost.

That understanding is what differentiates what we do and what medical science does, if you replace the word 'threads' with 'consciousness' then you will possibly get an insight into how we deal with this.

Threads are going backward in time, consciousness is happening right now.

I am not dismissing what has happened to someone because it was reality for the person at that time and sometimes it is helpful for someone to go back and see beyond the event and understand what they did within their own consciousness which has been creating their current predicament since that time.

Everything starts and finishes with a thought, it started with one thought 'the trigger' which created an inner conflict and it will end with another thought which will transform the inner conflict back into wholeness.

Hi Giles,
In terms of taking the easy road is this not what you meant "If, at this precise moment in time, I took any person and placed two cards in front of them, one saying "I choose to be happy, positive etc." and the other saying "I choose to be unhappy, angry etc." and asked them to pick one, how many people would really honestly choose the latter card?". Now I agree that most would choose the happy card, but that does not make the decision right for the person at that time.
I understand that many gurus have advocated the release of suffering, perhaps they were ready, but for many there is a process of suffering that leads (eventually) to the point where the issue can be released, and this is different to choosing to not allow it to intrude in the now - this is part of healing. It is not therefore just "the needs of the present moment" that matter, the future matters as well, and sometimes we need to go through difficult things to get to a better place, like chemotherapy for instance, we put up with the problems it brings in order to have a chance at a better future.
As an aside I have looked at the life of Buddha, and while I think he achieved exactly what he set out to do, he missed out on a lot, a bit like reading only the first and last pages of a book, and missing out on all the wonderful words in between.
So I think that suffering, like pain can have a value, and simple avoidance can work against the person in certain cases. Overcoming suffering, facing it and dealing with it can build a person, it can make them realise their inner strength, while avoiding it does not.

I have not challenged Paul's being in the now, Paul has made many statements that are not about that, for instance "Outside of this physical reality there is no time or distance" and "this physical reality everything is made up on electrons and neutrons etc, which are bound together with consciousness (thought) to form this reality." I asked for the evidence to back these up - because I have not seen any. And yes - while superstrings are only a theory the scientists are always looking for supportive evidence, and the theory is at least based on evidence they have. Nothing ultimately can be proven, but we accept beyond reasonable doubt, this is why the children who recall past lives are important, the things they recall, the details and the people have later been verified, and the chances that they just heard all of this detail has been realistically ruled out.
In terms of past life regression, this doubt carries more weight as it is usually done on older, more widely experienced people. The test of reasonable doubt can easily be applied to the question of whether consciousness binds neutrons together, and while it could be true it has no supporting evidence and so fails (unless Paul has some, in which case I am interested).

Yes - it is my belief that we journey and evolve, I have examined what I see and questioned at each stage, and there have been things that I feel cannot be reasonably explained by any other means. I have tried the 'discernment' test of contacting spirits, and examined the possibility that it is just all within my mind (and others), or pure statistical chance, and once I have discarded the points that carry doubt I am still left with some that pass the test. I have done healing and looked at the possibility that it is just placebo, or time based chance, and when the possible are set aside I am still left with those events that I believe prove healing works. So it is a belief, but then your belief in the 'Now' is only that, it cannot be proven.

So - I do not doubt that people can use your model of the 'Now' to achieve things, I do understand it, and I do not doubt that it works, but that does not mean that it is the best thing for a person, it does not mean that it is in their best interests, it just means that they can lose the suffering. I have looked at the benefits of working within the suffering, of facing the issues and understanding them, of losing the fear of them, of forgiving them and of letting them go, and I have seen that that process brings total healing, whilst the avoidance simply puts the issues aside, it postpones the eventual need to deal with them and heals only the symptoms. This was not an easy thing to realise, it changed completely how I viewed healing, and how I did it, but it became much more effective and rewarding.
love
chris

What else can I say to someone who believes that they must choose to suffer in the present moment on a belief of what may be in the future?

You are free to have your own beliefs, and I wish you all the best with your suffering. (although it does sound really odd to say that to someone)

All Love and Reiki Hugs

I must agree with Giles, that belief goes against everything that I personally understand, practice and teach concerning healing and personal development.

I do not understand how that belief serves you or the people that you apply it to as healing!

Hi Giles,
Thanks for the best wishes, and yes- I am free and I feel free.
The issue of suffering is really about learning, and of course learning is about evolving and becoming better - better for the future, and better in the now. We learn nothing from avoidance, only from understanding and facing the challenges that life allows us the chance to face. It is in this way that we learn to walk in grace in the world, not as one who discards issues but as one who overcomes them. We learn to be proud of our strengths rather than ashamed of our weaknesses. This is part of the process of growth rather than arresting development, of evolution instead of deferment, it is how personal development is achieved, by comprehension rather than ignorance, it is part of the story of mankind.

Practically of course we see an example of 'live for the moment' and have no care for the future all around us in the credit crunch. We have borrowed to enjoy the moment and left ourselves with unsustainable debt, and now we suffer much more than if we had properly dealt with the situation at the time. The apparent freedom that 'spend today' brings is illusory, in reality it solves nothing and only leaves a legacy for others to deal with. It is a kind of imbalance akin to fraud, for balance will have to re-instated at some stage, so anyone that advocates spend for today and discards the idea of caring about saving for or managing the needs of tomorrow is at best ignorant and at worst deceitful - they take temporary relief from the symptom of budgetary imbalance. How can we not be learning this lesson when it is so clearly in front of us?

So while I agree it sounds odd to accept suffering, it is the price one pays for progress, and of course progress is about the future - planning for the future is important, and there is nothing quite as good for planning as a clean sheet rather than one that still has unfinished, occluded activities cluttering it up.

In terms of healing, acceptance that suffering has a place allows issues to be dealt with by love and compassion, rather than aloofness, sympathetically and with understanding that is tailored to a personal level, yes it does take time, but we have time, and sometimes it does involve 'procrastination', but that brings with it compassion, empathy and a gentleness that puts the client's needs first rather than making them hurry, forcing them to discard issues and thrust aside things that do matter to them. It gives them freedom instead of coercion and allows them to realise who they are not who someone else judges they should be - it allows them to effect their own healing in a long-term effective manner.

None of this stops anyone from being happy, suffering is not the antonym of happiness, or joy - so while I understand the system you advocate it is not developmental, it adds no value other than temporary relief of symptoms.
love
chris

The issue of suffering is really about learning, and of course learning is about evolving and becoming better - better for the future, and better in the now. We learn nothing from avoidance, only from understanding and facing the challenges that life allows us the chance to face.

You keep referring to living in the Now as "avoidance", which would indicate that you aren't truly understanding what living in the Now is really about. "Avoidance" has negative connurtations as if living in the Now is pretending that the things of the past never happened. That is not what it is about. The events of the past are known, what happened happened, we have learnt from those past events, and we can use knowledge of the past events in the present momement, but that doesn't mean that we should let the memories of the past cause us further suffering, or even happiness etc., in the present moment, as it detracts from the needs of what is here in front of us right Now. By living with the suffering from the past, if anything, you are avoiding the present, and that can be a dangerous thing to do.

It is in this way that we learn to walk in grace in the world, not as one who discards issues but as one who overcomes them. We learn to be proud of our strengths rather than ashamed of our weaknesses.

So, suffering is about boosting the ego? To be able to say "I'm `better` because I have gone through suffering." Such judgements only come from ego, and aren't needed.

This is part of the process of growth rather than arresting development, of evolution instead of deferment, it is how personal development is achieved, by comprehension rather than ignorance, it is part of the story of mankind.

Living in the Now doesn't arrest development, it allows us to learn and live life to the maximum of our potential. As for the story of mankind... well... if you want to live as everyone else has in the past, I think the state of the world can show you where that leads.

Practically of course we see an example of 'live for the moment' and have no care for the future all around us in the credit crunch. We have borrowed to enjoy the moment and left ourselves with unsustainable debt, and now we suffer much more than if we had properly dealt with the situation at the time. The apparent freedom that 'spend today' brings is illusory, in reality it solves nothing and only leaves a legacy for others to deal with. It is a kind of imbalance akin to fraud, for balance will have to re-instated at some stage, so anyone that advocates spend for today and discards the idea of caring about saving for or managing the needs of tomorrow is at best ignorant and at worst deceitful - they take temporary relief from the symptom of budgetary imbalance. How can we not be learning this lesson when it is so clearly in front of us?

You are absolutely correct. Those who "live for the moment" and are greedy for material things in that way, will no doubt suffer (but isn't that ok with you as you advocate suffering? :confused:). However, "living in the present moment, in the Now" is anything but "living for the moment". Someone who borrows money to live for the moment is not living for the good of everyone, but for their own selfish reasons, and this is not what living in the Now is about. Living in the Now, if we were to describe it by the model of teachings of Advaita, involves Acting on the needs of the present moment, and those Act's will be what is truthfully needed at that time, and that can only be for the benefit of the Universe. Only the mind, with it's attachments to the past and it's false ideas of the future, will get in the way and corrupt Actions, turning them into Re-Actions (actions based on past ideas), and these reactions are not truthful actions and lead to suffering.

So while I agree it sounds odd to accept suffering, it is the price one pays for progress, and of course progress is about the future - planning for the future is important, and there is nothing quite as good for planning as a clean sheet rather than one that still has unfinished, occluded activities cluttering it up.

This makes no sense. It sounds as though you would be happy for a person who has suffered e.g. childhood abuse, to live their whole life suffering with the emotions of that, until their dying day, in the belief that they are bettering themselves because they are suffering. I can't agree with that I'm afraid.

In terms of healing, acceptance that suffering has a place allows issues to be dealt with by love and compassion, rather than aloofness, sympathetically and with understanding that is tailored to a personal level, yes it does take time, but we have time, and sometimes it does involve 'procrastination', but that brings with it compassion, empathy and a gentleness that puts the client's needs first rather than making them hurry, forcing them to discard issues and thrust aside things that do matter to them. It gives them freedom instead of coercion and allows them to realise who they are not who someone else judges they should be - it allows them to effect their own healing in a long-term effective manner.

You seem to be judging other healing practices as the complete opposite of your own and making vaste assumptions about what they do in the process.

None of this stops anyone from being happy, suffering is not the antonym of happiness, or joy - so while I understand the system you advocate it is not developmental, it adds no value other than temporary relief of symptoms.

Then I'm right. You clearly don't understand. "not developmental", "temporary relief"... this is your own misguided perception, and I can only assume you have not experienced the permanent relief that can be achieved and the progress this relief can give to a person so that they can get on and use their full potential to achieve what they want without being held back in their suffering.

I could go on, but I feel my words will be misinterpreted/misunderstood some more.

All Love and Reiki hugs

Hi Energylz,

If one accepts " but that doesn't mean that we should let the memories of the past cause us further suffering, or even happiness etc., in the present moment" it assumes that these memories have no further value, and I do not believe this is true, otherwise people would not keep them, they use these memories until they have finished with them, then they are ready to heal. Take for instance if a parent dies, there is a period where one suffers, but that period, called mourning, is a useful process and allows closure. If instead it is simply discarded as if it is no longer of any consequence then the closure will not occur. So it is not dangerous, but quite the opposite - it enables survival with balance.

Suffering is not about boosting the ego - overcoming difficulties teaches us self-reliance, we learn, however any time we go through a learning process we emerge different, and possibly better than we were. The alternative is stagnation.
Now it is very judgemental of you to suggest that mankind's advances are wrong in some way, you assume that where we are is wrong, and that you know better - where is the ego now?

Acting on the needs of now without any thought for the future as you suggested can never be right - and yet you now decide what is good for the Universe - is this another judgement? We are designed to plan for the future - many animals do this, it is part of the survival mechanism, yet you judge that we do it falsely?

There is no need for someone to live all their life suffering, the process of healing will be complete when the person is able to face the issues that activated the suffering, lose their fear of them and forgive. This allows proper closure and this is called healing, but to simply discard it all declaring that it has no value in the now provides no closure, and therefore no healing - it simply covers up the symptoms of the problem.
love
chris

If one accepts " but that doesn't mean that we should let the memories of the past cause us further suffering, or even happiness etc., in the present moment" it assumes that these memories have no further value, and I do not believe this is true, otherwise people would not keep them, they use these memories until they have finished with them, then they are ready to heal.

You seem to be treating healing as if the suffering and memories are the same thing?

For example, I could upset someone I love by what I say, and lose them from my life, causing me suffering. But, I could choose not to suffer from it as the suffering serves no purpose in the present moment. Instead I have the memory of what happened, and I can keep that memory to ensure that I don't so the same action again. But what you are saying is that, in order for me not to do the same thing again, I must not only remember the memory, but I must feel the suffering from it too. That makes no sense. Memories and the lessons learnt from previous actions do not require suffering for them to be applied in the present moment.

Let's take your example though...

Take for instance if a parent dies, there is a period where one suffers, but that period, called mourning, is a useful process and allows closure. If instead it is simply discarded as if it is no longer of any consequence then the closure will not occur. So it is not dangerous, but quite the opposite - it enables survival with balance.

What is closure? Why is mourning useful? There are some cultures in the world, especially in places that are difficult to survice in, where a new born child is not loved by the parents until it reaches a certain age. This is because the chances of survival at such a young age are slim. The mother doesn't become attached to the child, and if the child dies, there is no mourning for it, just life carries on. It is an accepted part of that culture. Mourning is a concept that has been created in some societies... something that we are told we must do. The roots of mourning can be shown to revolve, not around the person who has died, but around the person who is mourning... e.g. "I never had a chance to say I was sorry", "I miss them so much" etc. it's all about the "I" and seldom about the other person. It may sound harsh to hear, but this suffering is not at all necessary. There are plenty of examples of people who do not mourn the death of someone, and others go around saying "they're holding it in", "they need to let it out" etc. but that assumes that they know that person better than themselves, and that person is often absolutely fine and already accepted of the facts of what has happened; they just have no selfish need to suffer as a consequence.

Suffering is not about boosting the ego - overcoming difficulties teaches us self-reliance, we learn, however any time we go through a learning process we emerge different, and possibly better than we were. The alternative is stagnation.

No. We learn truth from experience and experience is the events that happen. Experience doesn't have to include suffering. Suffering only serves to take our awareness awy from the events that are happening Now. How can ignoring the lessons that are right in front of us now be more beneficial than getting attached to events that have passed and that can no longer be acted upon.

Now it is very judgemental of you to suggest that mankind's advances are wrong in some way, you assume that where we are is wrong, and that you know better - where is the ego now?

I never said it was wrong. I simply observe that the world lives in duality, and creates its own suffering, and by your own words, you choose to follow suite. I don't claim to know better, I do not ask you to change your beliefs, or do what I say, I am simply discussing what I have put into practice and know as truth from experience (not from just being told it by someone else).

It was you who said that suffering makes us proud of our strengths. Why is there a need to be proud? Why is there a need to compare against others to create a belief of being better than something else... which again is a dualistic view of the world. That is the ego I am referring to. If you truly believe that we are all part of the One, then there is no competition; there is no need to be "better" or "proud". Strength comes from acting in truth.

Acting on the needs of now without any thought for the future as you suggested can never be right - and yet you now decide what is good for the Universe - is this another judgement? We are designed to plan for the future - many animals do this, it is part of the survival mechanism, yet you judge that we do it falsely?

You seem to be interpreting my words as judgement when they are not. Simple as that. Acting for the good of the universe is to act without selfishness; to act with selflessness instead. There is nothing judgemental about that.

There is no need for someone to live all their life suffering, the process of healing will be complete when the person is able to face the issues that activated the suffering, lose their fear of them and forgive.

How can you face something that is in the past? It's not here in the present moment, except as a creation of the mind, and that is just perceptions and not reality of what was truly the event in the past.

This allows proper closure and this is called healing, but to simply discard it all declaring that it has no value in the now provides no closure, and therefore no healing - it simply covers up the symptoms of the problem.

Treating the cause of the symptoms will remove the symptoms (something Doctors would be wise to heed). The cause of suffering comes from within the mind, and it really can be as simple as choosing to end that suffering. It may mean the person has to recognise the mind for what it is doing to them, and that is the obstacle that many face, but when they recognise it, that can lead them to the cause and allow them to say "No, I won't accept this suffering Now, it's not real".

All Love and Reiki Hugs

Acting on the needs of now without any thought for the future as you suggested can never be right - and yet you now decide what is good for the Universe - is this another judgement? We are designed to plan for the future - many animals do this, it is part of the survival mechanism, yet you judge that we do it falsely?

But it's right for some people Chris, many people are capable of knowing what is right for them and what's not, I like to think I'm one of them and right now I can't see any value in planning for the future I could get run over by a bus tomorrow and I also don't see the point of it from the angle of 'inner knowing' I've always been looked after by some divine/invisible source I call the Universe or God so I have no reason right now to believe that willnot continue to be the case, I also don't believe in behaving a certain way because we are old so I have no concerns that I may be poor in my dotage so there's no point in my worrying about it now, I'm 42 and money is to be spent on having a good time but of course all this is only my point of view but one which you appear to have negated as you seem to speak for everyone when you say things like above.
I don't think people who do plan are doing anything 'falsely' I just think there is an element of worrying about stuff that has not happened and may never happen along with making assumptions such as 'I might need looking after when I'm old' or ' I need to put this money away in case I am poor when I'm old' etc, seems to me like a good argument for keeping people in a place of constant worry about 'what if's?' and that place of worry leads to dis-empowerment and in my personal and professional opinion dis-empowerment then leads to dishonest and unhealthy relationships, bad career moves and a million and one other things that make us anxious, unhappy, unfulfilled etc etc and then people probably end up in healing where if they are lucky they may get a therapist who talks about The Now.

Love

Rebecca xx

Chris P.S I don't think there is any evidence for the fact that we are designed to plan for the future I think this is an earlthy, man made creation, I believe what we are designed for is to be as happy and blissful as we can be which then puts us in a vibration which attracts abundance and good health and if we have good health and abundance there then becomes nothing to plan for.

Love

Rebecca X

Hi Energylz,

The example you cite of losing someone from your life and deciding to not to suffer from it by simply keeping the memory as a lesson is exactly why this model is flawed - it generates a kind of attitude that is entirely selfish seeing only a possible 'lesson' that you might learn from, with no regard for the connections to the person that have been lost, no regard for how they may feel about the events or that they are now 'discarded' from your care. The egocentric nature of this alone makes it completely alien to me - I see no love or compassion, and no kindness or caring at all.

Mourning does provide closure, and it is a natural process that is not only evident in humans but is evident in animals as well. The fact that some people take a view that they choose to avoid becoming attached to a baby because of the high mortality rates does not mean that they do not mourn, for when their children grow up and die, or when their spouse dies, or their parents they do mourn. The process of closure allows them to get past the suffering that they feel and begin to appreciate the positives of the legacy that has been left - this is healing, it is about identifying the issue, facing it and losing the fear of it, forgiving and then accepting it. I do agree that a lot can be about the loss that they feel and that loss is theirs, the things that they forgot to say, this too is part of the forgiveness that they need to find - and yes you do sound harsh, I've already commented on that above.
Many people will offer advice and frequently it is based on their own experiences, and it may sound as if they think they know what is best for someone else, often this is due to inexperience but most often it is a caring action performed as best as they know how.

Now suffering is not just about being "attached to events that have passed and that can no longer be acted upon", it is in many cases a review, a process that allows us to process the events in hindsight and to come to terms with them, to heal. To simply pass them off as something that takes "our awareness awy from the events that are happening Now" and so discard them makes renders worthless all the feeling we had for people, it is just calloused and bleak. Where is the love and compassion in all this?

You say that "I don't claim to know better" and yet you have "and that can only be for the benefit of the Universe", this switching between judgemental and claiming to be non-judgemental just sounds insincere.

Now I never said "suffering makes us proud of our strengths" - I said it teaches us self-reliance, so your accusation "I could go on, but I feel my words will be misinterpreted/misunderstood some more" - perhaps you might try looking in the mirror. There is no comparison with others, it is about each understanding ourselves, and realising our abilities.

You ask "How can you face something that is in the past?", but the issue that is still with the person is not in the past, only the actions are. The issue is still current, these are the issues you say you can decide to simply discard. I agree that treating the cause of the symptoms will remove the symptoms - that is the whole point, simply discarding the suffering will never treat the cause, it provides only temporary relief of the symptom.


Hi Rebecca,
There may be times when it seems like planning for the future has no relevance in today's world. The example saving for a pension scheme, especially given the uncertainty of the stock market and the long term management of pension payments renders them worryingly unpredictable at best. And you are right, you may be run over by a bus rendering any planning as 'wasted'. But none of this makes any difference that we need to plan for the future.
If you really feel like that then what stops you just spending everything now on having a good time? Just splurge the lot. The fact is that by doing so you risk the future, when your appliances break they cannot be replaced, when you cannot pay for where you live you will be evicted, this is not just about your old age, this is about the next second, the next hour, the next day as much as it is about long term planning.
If you are feeling that this is way of "keeping people in place of constant worry" than you see it from the wrong side, for when saving becomes established, when the mortgage is sorted, and the bills can be paid, then the worry is no longer a problem. The way to deal with worry is to do something about the cause of the worry.
The glitter of 'live only for the moment' is an illusion, it appears to work but it is temporary. If all that a therapist dealing with the now can provide is temporary then all they do is put off the very suffering they claim to remove, for a period of time only. The suffering will return because it has not been dealt with, merely ignored or occluded.

There is ample evidence that mankind is built to plan for the future, it is actually what often allows us to survive the present, for we earlier planned for the time we now find ourselves in. You suggest that "what we are designed for is to be as happy and blissful as we can be which then puts us in a vibration which attracts abundance and good health and if we have good health and abundance there then becomes nothing to plan for." - and yet the idea of abundance is all about the future, for surly you do not mean one fleeting second of abundance, but continued abundance, of ongoing health into the future not just this instance of Now. So when we are in that vibration, and we have some level of abundance and health, we work to maintain it into the future, we use our abundance so that it will last, we look after our health in order that it will continue, we do not just spend it all and take reckless chances with our health (actually some do I suppose, there are ample examples of drug addicts that behave like this).
We are actually designed on earth for survival, and the survival of those we give rise to, so looking to the future is fundamental to that - we have no right to a happy and abundant life, we need to achieve it, sometimes finding that vibration you speak of will help us to achieve it, and of course happiness and abundance mean many different things to many people.

love
chris

The example you cite of losing someone from your life and deciding to not to suffer from it by simply keeping the memory as a lesson is exactly why this model is flawed - it generates a kind of attitude that is entirely selfish seeing only a possible 'lesson' that you might learn from, with no regard for the connections to the person that have been lost, no regard for how they may feel about the events or that they are now 'discarded' from your care. The egocentric nature of this alone makes it completely alien to me - I see no love or compassion, and no kindness or caring at all.

So, if someone came to me for help and wanted to be free of their suffering, I should tell them they are being selfish and should carry on suffering? That doesn't sound like compassion or kindness to me. If they choose to be free of suffering right there and now, and I can help facilitate that for them, then surely that is the compassionate and kind thing to do? The way you describe healing sounds very limited, in that you are saying the only way to heal is to go through the suffering and continue suffering until they, how shall we say.... get it out of their system. This sounds like traditional councelling sessions where the councellor doesn't really offer any advice or suggestions, but just lets the client talk through their problems over and over until such a time they realise they're not going to get help and have to do it themselves, and after all that pain and suffering too.

and yes you do sound harsh, I've already commented on that above.

The point of me saying that I may sound harsh, is to give an indicator that there's more to it than you are likely to first read. It sounds harsh, but it isn't. If you read it as being harsh, then you haven't understood it from the point of it not being harsh. It's a matter of perception.

Many people will offer advice and frequently it is based on their own experiences, and it may sound as if they think they know what is best for someone else, often this is due to inexperience but most often it is a caring action performed as best as they know how.

Not sure what your point is. I certainly wouldn't choose what is best for someone else, I would let them choose for themselves. I can only offer techniques and concepts to help them understand their own issue and choose to be clear of it if that's what they want. Non of those things would ask them to suffer though, and it would be clear that these things can help them to be completely free of suffering if they choose it.

Now suffering is not just about being "attached to events that have passed and that can no longer be acted upon", it is in many cases a review, a process that allows us to process the events in hindsight and to come to terms with them, to heal. To simply pass them off as something that takes "our awareness awy from the events that are happening Now" and so discard them makes renders worthless all the feeling we had for people, it is just calloused and bleak. Where is the love and compassion in all this?

So a person going through suffering from an event in the past, who is distracted from the needs of the present moment is better to carry on suffering (even though that past event is no longer happening) at the expense of those who may need that person in the present? It's possible to review and learn from what happened in the past without feeling all the emotions and suffering in the present moment. Just because a person chooses not to suffer, doesn't mean they have discarded what happened in the past, doesn't render the connection they had with other people discarded, doesn't change the past at all. There is love and compassion in bring present and not suffering. What is the point of suffering emotional attachment to something or someone in the past? It won't change the past and will only serve to damage the present. Whether you see that as callouse and bleak is your own perception, but I would suggest to you that all those people who practice living in the present moment and being free of their attachments from the past, are some of the most kind, caring and loving people you could ever meet.

You say that "I don't claim to know better" and yet you have "and that can only be for the benefit of the Universe", this switching between judgemental and claiming to be non-judgemental just sounds insincere.

Acting truthfully in the moment at no expense to others, can only be of benefit. It's not a judgement, it's an observation, or a knowledge. I think you are simply interpreting my words in your own way as being judgemental when they are not. I can only try and clarify, but I cannnot make you understand.

Now I never said "suffering makes us proud of our strengths" - I said it teaches us self-reliance, so your accusation "I could go on, but I feel my words will be misinterpreted/misunderstood some more" - perhaps you might try looking in the mirror. There is no comparison with others, it is about each understanding ourselves, and realising our abilities.

Previously you said:

It is in this way that we learn to walk in grace in the world, not as one who discards issues but as one who overcomes them. We learn to be proud of our strengths rather than ashamed of our weaknesses.

Quite clearly you say that suffering makes you proud of your strengths. Proudness and "strength" are concepts of the ego mind, that mind that compares one against another and sees one thing as seperate and wants to make us feel that we have to somehow be better than others, ignoring the fact we are all One. This is all I refer to; the difference between the dualistic comparisons and the knowledge of all being One. When I look in the mirror, you wouldn't believe what I can see.

You ask "How can you face something that is in the past?", but the issue that is still with the person is not in the past, only the actions are. The issue is still current,...

No it's not. The issue is in the past. Only stored memories, corrupted by the mind and the emotions they can create in the present if we choose to let them, exist now.

... these are the issues you say you can decide to simply discard. I agree that treating the cause of the symptoms will remove the symptoms - that is the whole point, simply discarding the suffering will never treat the cause, it provides only temporary relief of the symptom.

If you believe that treating the cause will only remove the symptoms, then you are not understanding healing. The cause of suffering is the mind, so healing the mind... choosing to be present.... stilling the mind from it's corrupt behaviour of bringing unnecessary emotions up for things that do not exist in the present... is not simply removing symptoms, it's pure healing. Memories cannot be removed. Actions from the past cannot be removed. But we can choose to be aware of the mind and control it, rather than let the mind control us. When we are in control of the mind, we become present and the mind can no longer cause unnecessary suffering.

As for whether it's temporary or not, that is up to the individual to choose. You may want to choose for it to be temporary and for the suffering to return later. Most people I know, myself included, would choose to remove suffering and live life in the present moment to it's fullest.

All Love and Reiki Hugs

If you are feeling that this is way of "keeping people in place of constant worry" than you see it from the wrong side, for when saving becomes established, when the mortgage is sorted, and the bills can be paid, then the worry is no longer a problem. The way to deal with worry is to do something about the cause of the worry.
The glitter of 'live only for the moment' is an illusion, it appears to work but it is temporary. If all that a therapist dealing with the now can provide is temporary then all they do is put off the very suffering they claim to remove, for a period of time only. The suffering will return because it has not been dealt with, merely ignored or occluded.

There is ample evidence that mankind is built to plan for the future, it is actually what often allows us to survive the present, for we earlier planned for the time we now find ourselves in. You suggest that "what we are designed for is to be as happy and blissful as we can be which then puts us in a vibration which attracts abundance and good health and if we have good health and abundance there then becomes nothing to plan for." - and yet the idea of abundance is all about the future, for surly you do not mean one fleeting second of abundance, but continued abundance, of ongoing health into the future not just this instance of Now. So when we are in that vibration, and we have some level of abundance and health, we work to maintain it into the future, we use our abundance so that it will last, we look after our health in order that it will continue, we do not just spend it all and take reckless chances with our health (actually some do I suppose, there are ample examples of drug addicts that behave like this).
We are actually designed on earth for survival, and the survival of those we give rise to, so looking to the future is fundamental to that - we have no right to a happy and abundant life, we need to achieve it, sometimes finding that vibration you speak of will help us to achieve it, and of course happiness and abundance mean many different things to many people.

Hi Chris, Proper little ray of sunshine aren't you?:)
I don't get this I need you to explain to me if you will please why you are assuming everybody cares about such things as the mortgage being paid up and the bills being paid on time, I could not give a something I can't say on HP, these are not my values if they are yours and it rocks your boat and makes you feel all nice and secure that your mortage and bills are paid then I am happy for you and anybody who shares those same values but they are not mine, as for worrying about those times when the mortgage and bills may not be paid either at all or on time I gave up worrying about that 20 years ago when it dawned on me that worrying about it won't make the money needed fall out of the sky then when I stopped worrying about it the money fell out of the sky lol.
For me there is nothing 'glittery' about The Now and I don't feel it removes the illusion of whatever is wrong and the issue of whether or not the Now is permenant or temporary is surely up to the client to choose?
I also don't think learning to stay in The Now ignores or occludes suffering I think it all depends on where people are in their journey to wellness, if I had heard about the concept of The Now when my healing journey began 9 years ago I would not have bought into it because I would not have been ready and I know that because the issue of Mindfulness was often mentioned in my counselling studies, I now know that I was not ready to listen because I was not ready to take resposibility for my life it was much easier to apportion blame and feel sorry for myself it meant I did not have to make changes which scared me to death or look at myself in the grand scheme of things.
No I don't think we do 'work' to keep the level of abundance and health we have I think we just have to trust and it will be there by remaining in the vibration we have chosen.
Why can't we just spend it and be reckless and you asked me why I don't do that how do you know I don't?

I do believe we have an automatic right to a happy and abundant life and what your idea of reckless is may be somebody else's idea of a good time, I'm sorry but other than the adverts on TV for Scottish Widows pensions and the like I don't see any evidence for the fact that we are 'designed' to plan for the future, I'm not saying it is in any way wrong for people to do so but I don't want to because my future is already in the bag and I'm struggling to understand why you feel that our entitlement to happiness and abundance is not a right?

Love

Rebecca XX

Hi Energylz,

Of course as healers we always want to help. However simply providing temporary relief by alleviating symptoms does not help to heal the issue, it does have value, because it does give relief, and often, especially in acute cases relief is very welcome, but the core issues still remain to be addressed. Those issues need to be faced by the client and dealt with no matter what kind of healing the healer practises, and avoidance will not provide the solution. This is not counselling, though there may be parts of that if needed, this is an acknowledgement that the healing has to come from within, this is true even in traditional medicine where drugs provide support but the healing is derived from within the client.

The issue of treating people in a harsh manner, even if that is only their perception, is that it relegates them to nothing more than someone in a queue while apparently boosting the healer to high status, the client becomes someone who 'can procrastinate in their own time', and that is just wrong, these are people in need, each one looking for support, they are not widgets on a conveyor line. This is the main complaint about the NHS, and that says something, saying that one cannot put up with "the pitfalls of procrastination, indecision and constantly going around the houses for months and years" does sound uncaring.
So you say you "wouldn't choose what is best for someone else" but there are things you would deny them because you believe is not right for them, is this not the same thing?

Now we have "So a person going through suffering from an event in the past, who is distracted from the needs of the present moment is better to carry on suffering (even though that past event is no longer happening) at the expense of those who may need that person in the present?" - we are talking about the client here, whatever is best for them needs be, why are you considering those who need them? Or is it that you need them to do what you think they need? You say "There is love and compassion in bring present" but this is at odds with being in the Now and only selecting things that are self-serving, the two are not mutually exclusive, but they are not aligned at all. Being in the Now is about self, self, self.
"some of the most kind, caring and loving people you could ever meet.", but they may sound harsh and will not allow you the time to 'procrastinate'.

"Acting truthfully in the moment at no expense to others, can only be of benefit" - but there is always an expense to others if one decides (judges) and selects what they think is best for the Universe (a bit god like really).

The issue and the memories (not corrupt memories for this again relegates the client to be at fault), are the same to the client, they are not the same as the event(s), those are passed, but the memories were made as the event unfolded, and the view of those memories has developed as they are reviewed, and they are at the heart of the issue, to simply discard them will not expunge them, they continue on until resolved.

Controlling the mind to stop its corrupt behaviour you describe as pure healing. Any control will be effective only so long as it is employed, when attention drifts the issues return, this is not a permanent solution - merely transitory control.



Hi Rebecca,
I used the money based comparison because you brought it up "money is to be spent on having a good time" in terms of planning for the future. If I was to choose an example not in response to your post I would choose family or tribal examples for they are more illustrative - so it was your example that I replied to.
I believe we are designed to plan ahead simply because we do, it is a constant thing in our lives, it is part of being human, and it is part of being spirit - it is the very aim of health and happiness and abundance that makes the planning worth doing. I agree that there is a lot of guff about advertising and playing on peoples' fears about this kind of thing, especially in the insurance industry, but simple planning is an everyday event, right down to today's shopping list.

I don't believe we have a right to anything, we have to work at it. Take health for instance, there is no right to health, if someone abuses their body with alcohol than they will experience the health issues that come with alcohol abuse. So we need to look after our bodies in order to have the best chance of good health. I also see that there are people born with chronic health problems, what of their rights? Where is their right to abundance? There are people born into war situations, what of their right to happiness?
I do think that we can work towards a situation (you describe it as a vibration) where we are happy, where we feel life is abundant and where we have good health, but that does not seem to constitute a right.
I understand that you think we have an automatic right to these things, you say "I've always been looked after by some divine/invisible source I call the Universe or God". So I assume that it is God that has bestowed upon you the automatic right to happiness and abundance. Why has He not bestowed it on all the other people in the world? You see a God that gives the right to happiness and abundance to a few, and a life of poverty and misery to others is not the kind of God that I recognise.
love
chris

Hi Energylz,

Of course as healers we always want to help. However simply providing temporary relief by alleviating symptoms does not help to heal the issue, it does have value, because it does give relief, and often, especially in acute cases relief is very welcome, but the core issues still remain to be addressed. Those issues need to be faced by the client and dealt with no matter what kind of healing the healer practises, and avoidance will not provide the solution. This is not counselling, though there may be parts of that if needed, this is an acknowledgement that the healing has to come from within, this is true even in traditional medicine where drugs provide support but the healing is derived from within the client.

I'm not sure where you get this idea from that such healing is "temporary" or just a relieving of the symptoms, or that it doesn't heal the core issue. This is clearly your own understanding of things, but it simply isn't correct. People I've worked with have had permanent release from their issues right to the cause, nothing re-appears, and nothing is ignored or requires effort to hold it at bay; and non of it has required them to undergo any prolonged suffering to "learn" from.

The issue of treating people in a harsh manner, even if that is only their perception, is that it relegates them to nothing more than someone in a queue while apparently boosting the healer to high status,...

This seems to be your own perception. You seem to believe that healing someone of their issue quickly is harsh (tell that to someone who has been suffering up to that point and wants to be free of it), and you also seem to believe that this has something to do with boosting the ego of the healer. Not quite sure how you've come to that conclusion.

... the client becomes someone who 'can procrastinate in their own time', and that is just wrong, these are people in need, each one looking for support, they are not widgets on a conveyor line. This is the main complaint about the NHS, and that says something, saying that one cannot put up with "the pitfalls of procrastination, indecision and constantly going around the houses for months and years" does sound uncaring.
So you say you "wouldn't choose what is best for someone else" but there are things you would deny them because you believe is not right for them, is this not the same thing?

I don't understand you. What would I deny them? Suffering? People who have come to me for help don't want their suffering. You're one of the first people I've ever met who seems to want to suffer. Your choice.

Now we have "So a person going through suffering from an event in the past, who is distracted from the needs of the present moment is better to carry on suffering (even though that past event is no longer happening) at the expense of those who may need that person in the present?" - we are talking about the client here, whatever is best for them needs be, why are you considering those who need them? Or is it that you need them to do what you think they need?

No. Simply through observation, those people are typically suffering from something in the past, and by their own admission it is effecting their present... "I shouted at the children and they'd done nothing wrong"... ."My partner says he can't live with me like this any more" etc. etc. All of which point to them putting all their energy and focus on something from the past and not what needs are going on in front of them.

You say "There is love and compassion in bring present" but this is at odds with being in the Now and only selecting things that are self-serving, the two are not mutually exclusive, but they are not aligned at all. Being in the Now is about self, self, self.

You misunderstand. Being in the Now is about true Self not the little egotistical self. It is selfless not selfish. It is not being focused on just an individual, but on everything that is present. True Love and True Compassion are found in the Now.

"some of the most kind, caring and loving people you could ever meet.", but they may sound harsh and will not allow you the time to 'procrastinate'.

I've yet to meet one who tells you you must do something they say. If you choose to procrastinate, to carry on suffering, they will not stop you, they will simply tell you that you can choose to be free of that suffering it you wish. You must have met different people living in the Now to those I've met.

"Acting truthfully in the moment at no expense to others, can only be of benefit" - but there is always an expense to others if one decides (judges) and selects what they think is best for the Universe (a bit god like really).

If you are Acting in the moment... meeting the needs of what is right in front of you Now... there is no decision, no selection, no judgement as those things only come from the mind based on ideas of the past. Acting on the needs of the present moment does not involve thoughtless mind and ego, and such acts cannot be wrong. I think you are failing to see the differentiation here.

The issue and the memories (not corrupt memories for this again relegates the client to be at fault), are the same to the client, they are not the same as the event(s), those are passed, but the memories were made as the event unfolded, and the view of those memories has developed as they are reviewed, and they are at the heart of the issue, to simply discard them will not expunge them, they continue on until resolved.

You can't discard memories, and saying that the memories are corrupt is just another way of saying what you are saying in that they have developed in the mind. In that sense they are corrupt from what truly happened in the past because the mind has altered those memories from the truth. It is only your perception that has determined that this is judging a client and saying that it is their fault, I have never said that a client is at fault or to blame for the way their mind is working, only you have intimated that from within your own mind.

Controlling the mind to stop its corrupt behaviour you describe as pure healing. Any control will be effective only so long as it is employed, when attention drifts the issues return, this is not a permanent solution - merely transitory control.

There are techniques that can be used such as EFT, Freeway CER, etc. that can remove the emotions and suffering a person relates to issues from the past. However, to deal with the things that arise on a day to day basis, as life throws more and more things at us, learning to live in Now and be present, is good practice to prevent new issues and further suffering from being created and held onto.

Hi Rebecca,

I don't believe we have a right to anything,

I believe we do. We have the right to Be.

I understand that you think we have an automatic right to these things, you say "I've always been looked after by some divine/invisible source I call the Universe or God". So I assume that it is God that has bestowed upon you the automatic right to happiness and abundance. Why has He not bestowed it on all the other people in the world? You see a God that gives the right to happiness and abundance to a few, and a life of poverty and misery to others is not the kind of God that I recognise.

I don't recall Rebecca saying that she sees God as giving the right to happiness etc. to a few and not others.

Everyone has the right to be happy. Many choose not to be, or choose to suffer. Some have that right but can't exercise it in the present moment, simply because they are prevented by others; but that doesn't stop them from being mindful of their present situation with a view to take every opportunity to be free of their suffering to achieve happiness.

All Love and Reiki Hugs

Hi Energylz,

Of course as healers we always want to help. However simply providing temporary relief by alleviating symptoms does not help to heal the issue, it does have value, because it does give relief, and often, especially in acute cases relief is very welcome, but the core issues still remain to be addressed. Those issues need to be faced by the client and dealt with no matter what kind of healing the healer practises, and avoidance will not provide the solution. This is not counselling, though there may be parts of that if needed, this is an acknowledgement that the healing has to come from within, this is true even in traditional medicine where drugs provide support but the healing is derived from within the client.

The issue of treating people in a harsh manner, even if that is only their perception, is that it relegates them to nothing more than someone in a queue while apparently boosting the healer to high status, the client becomes someone who 'can procrastinate in their own time', and that is just wrong, these are people in need, each one looking for support, they are not widgets on a conveyor line. This is the main complaint about the NHS, and that says something, saying that one cannot put up with "the pitfalls of procrastination, indecision and constantly going around the houses for months and years" does sound uncaring.
So you say you "wouldn't choose what is best for someone else" but there are things you would deny them because you believe is not right for them, is this not the same thing?

Now we have "So a person going through suffering from an event in the past, who is distracted from the needs of the present moment is better to carry on suffering (even though that past event is no longer happening) at the expense of those who may need that person in the present?" - we are talking about the client here, whatever is best for them needs be, why are you considering those who need them? Or is it that you need them to do what you think they need? You say "There is love and compassion in bring present" but this is at odds with being in the Now and only selecting things that are self-serving, the two are not mutually exclusive, but they are not aligned at all. Being in the Now is about self, self, self.
"some of the most kind, caring and loving people you could ever meet.", but they may sound harsh and will not allow you the time to 'procrastinate'.

"Acting truthfully in the moment at no expense to others, can only be of benefit" - but there is always an expense to others if one decides (judges) and selects what they think is best for the Universe (a bit god like really).

The issue and the memories (not corrupt memories for this again relegates the client to be at fault), are the same to the client, they are not the same as the event(s), those are passed, but the memories were made as the event unfolded, and the view of those memories has developed as they are reviewed, and they are at the heart of the issue, to simply discard them will not expunge them, they continue on until resolved.

Controlling the mind to stop its corrupt behaviour you describe as pure healing. Any control will be effective only so long as it is employed, when attention drifts the issues return, this is not a permanent solution - merely transitory control.



Hi Rebecca,
I used the money based comparison because you brought it up "money is to be spent on having a good time" in terms of planning for the future. If I was to choose an example not in response to your post I would choose family or tribal examples for they are more illustrative - so it was your example that I replied to.
I believe we are designed to plan ahead simply because we do, it is a constant thing in our lives, it is part of being human, and it is part of being spirit - it is the very aim of health and happiness and abundance that makes the planning worth doing. I agree that there is a lot of guff about advertising and playing on peoples' fears about this kind of thing, especially in the insurance industry, but simple planning is an everyday event, right down to today's shopping list.

I don't believe we have a right to anything, we have to work at it. Take health for instance, there is no right to health, if someone abuses their body with alcohol than they will experience the health issues that come with alcohol abuse. So we need to look after our bodies in order to have the best chance of good health. I also see that there are people born with chronic health problems, what of their rights? Where is their right to abundance? There are people born into war situations, what of their right to happiness?
I do think that we can work towards a situation (you describe it as a vibration) where we are happy, where we feel life is abundant and where we have good health, but that does not seem to constitute a right.
I understand that you think we have an automatic right to these things, you say "I've always been looked after by some divine/invisible source I call the Universe or God". So I assume that it is God that has bestowed upon you the automatic right to happiness and abundance. Why has He not bestowed it on all the other people in the world? You see a God that gives the right to happiness and abundance to a few, and a life of poverty and misery to others is not the kind of God that I recognise.
love
chris

Hi Energylz,
From your example in the Root cause of suffering I see that E(D(C(B(A)))) when treated in the now can only deal with that that exists in the now, and that is E, the rest are not in the now and so cannot be dealt with. If one leaves the now, then D(C(B(A))) still exist and will cause the problems all over again. You would choose to suggest that they are all part of E, but they do not exist in the now, and so cannot be.

The impression I have of you and Paul treating people harshly comes from what you have written, if a doctor spoke of me or to me like that I would have the same impression. It has nothing to do with the speed of the treatment or healing, it is your attitudes towards the clients.

I do not want people to suffer, but I see that they need to heal at a rate that is right for them, when they are ready they will heal and the suffering will end, it is all about respect for the client. It is therefore not about denial, I offer healing at their rate, they will take it and use it to heal when they are ready.

I still do not see how your explanation about why you are "considering those who need them?" The focus even in your explanation just re-points at the client. Any suffering can affect those around in the world, but it is the client that has come for healing. Is it that you are judging that the effects on others is bad?

Self-serving is all about the ego - from the freedictionary "Serving one's own interests, especially without concern for the needs or interests of others" and from Merriam-Webster "serving one's own interests often in disregard of the truth or the interests of others" - this is at the core of your system, it is not about love or compassion, it is not about others, it is about the selfish ego inside and making sure it is best served. This is acting
In the moment, ensuring that one's choices are self-serving in a positive manner, self-serving "without concern for the needs or interests of others", and positive only for self.

As a way of life living in the now will work, but the moment one strays all the issues and symptoms that were kept at bay by the now will recur, nothing apart from the symptoms that existed in the now have been removed and nothing has been healed.



In terms of what Rebecca said, maybe I have misunderstood, but this is from her previous post:
"I've always been looked after by some divine/invisible source I call the Universe or God" but I assumed that those do not believe in God or those that are disadvantaged are not getting the protection.

There is a big difference between having the right to be happy and having the choice to be happy, there is no right to happiness or those that could invoke that right would. The same is true of abundance. However if there is a right, perhaps you can tell me from whom one can demand it, for a right is granted and must therefore be granted by someone.

love
chris

Hi Energylz,
From your example in the Root cause of suffering I see that E(D(C(B(A)))) when treated in the now can only deal with that that exists in the now, and that is E, the rest are not in the now and so cannot be dealt with. If one leaves the now, then D(C(B(A))) still exist and will cause the problems all over again. You would choose to suggest that they are all part of E, but they do not exist in the now, and so cannot be.

Hi Chris, I've already answered on the other thread, but in short for what you say here...

I don't choose to suggest that, the analogy states it. They can only exist in the Now, because the Now is all that there is. The past doesn't exist, just as the future doesn't exist. They are just concepts of the mind. Whatever issue exists, exists in the Now, so removing E does remove all of A,B,C and D as well. If you believe that the past exists, then please feel free to go back in time and change the "wrongs" (whatever they may be) of the world; I'm sure you know you can't and that you can only work in the Now.

The impression I have of you and Paul treating people harshly comes from what you have written, if a doctor spoke of me or to me like that I would have the same impression. It has nothing to do with the speed of the treatment or healing, it is your attitudes towards the clients.

What attitudes towards clients? A client comes asking for treatment for their issue, and their issue is dealt with. Nobody is saying that treatment wouldn't be courteous, or that they wouldn't be offered a drink or a friendly atmosphere. We're simply saying that we would deal with the issues that the person has Now, and now what they believed they had in the past or what they believe they will have in the future. It seems you would choose to make them comfortable and tell them they need to suffer and learn from it. If you were my doctor saying that, I'd go get a second opinion or seek help elsewhere.

I do not want people to suffer, but I see that they need to heal at a rate that is right for them, when they are ready they will heal and the suffering will end, it is all about respect for the client. It is therefore not about denial, I offer healing at their rate, they will take it and use it to heal when they are ready.

But that's what a client does when they come for healing. They are asking to be healed of their suffering Now. If they wanted it later, they'd come to you later.

I still do not see how your explanation about why you are "considering those who need them?" The focus even in your explanation just re-points at the client. Any suffering can affect those around in the world, but it is the client that has come for healing. Is it that you are judging that the effects on others is bad?

No, it is only observation that that is the case, and is usually indicated by the client themselves. No judgement on my part, except when I judge myself for my own effect on others around me. 😉

Self-serving is all about the ego - from the freedictionary "Serving one's own interests, especially without concern for the needs or interests of others" and from Merriam-Webster "serving one's own interests often in disregard of the truth or the interests of others" - this is at the core of your system, it is not about love or compassion, it is not about others, it is about the selfish ego inside and making sure it is best served. This is acting
In the moment, ensuring that one's choices are self-serving in a positive manner, self-serving "without concern for the needs or interests of others", and positive only for self.

You are turning being present in the moment of Now, into something completely different. It's not about "self serving" which relates to the egotistical self of the mind, but about recognising the True Self, or the observer, or complete awareness of One consciousness or however you want to label it. These are different things.

As a way of life living in the now will work, but the moment one strays all the issues and symptoms that were kept at bay by the now will recur, nothing apart from the symptoms that existed in the now have been removed and nothing has been healed.

Only in your concept that issues are "kept at bay" and your beliefe that only the latest symptoms are removed leaving underlying issues. That's simply not the case and is a misunderstanding on your part.

There is a big difference between having the right to be happy and having the choice to be happy, there is no right to happiness or those that could invoke that right would.

What is stopping them?

The same is true of abundance. However if there is a right, perhaps you can tell me from whom one can demand it, for a right is granted and must therefore be granted by someone.

The right is within your true Self. You cannot look outwards to something or someone "other" to find it, because the "other" only exists in your dualistic mind. Make the choice to have that right, and it is yours.

All Love and Reiki Hugs

Hi Chris

The impression I have of you and Paul treating people harshly comes from what you have written, if a doctor spoke of me or to me like that I would have the same impression. It has nothing to do with the speed of the treatment or healing, it is your attitudes towards the clients.

I can't speak for Giles thought he is quite capable of speaking for himself on this matter, but I am a plain spoken person who does not mince words or go round the houses, when something needs to be said I say it in plain understandable language and do not try and bamboozle them with jargon, mysticism or talk over their heads. People comment all of the time that it is quite refreshing to see a healer who says things as they are and explains things using plain language that they can understand.

When I am healing, I am very focused upon the job in hand, being down to earth, I deal with things in a straight forward, no nonsense, matter of fact way. They are paying me to heal them and that is what I do, I would hope to receive the same focus, dedication and directness from another healer if I went to them with a problem which I needed to receive healing for.

Hi Paul and giles,
I've replied here (after a fashion) to try to keep the similar threads down.

love
chris

There is a big difference between having the right to be happy and having the choice to be happy, there is no right to happiness or those that could invoke that right would.

Hi Chris,

I can't agree with this love, many people (whether they are aware of it or not) have too much invested in being in negativity whether that is ill health or just generally unhappy, I used to be one of them and I have seen it a thousand times in the different healing modalities which I teach and practice, the two most common contributing factors appear to be fear of change and or fear that they won't recieve the same love, attention, affection and time people give them if they were not ill or unhappy so they stay in patterns which they have learned get their needs met.

Love

Rebecca x