Sitting Still

Recently, I saw the following quotation in an article by Tommy Rosen, founder of Recovery 2.0, a tool that uses mindfulness (yoga) for recovery from addictions. Given that we are all dealing with aversion and grasping, longing and dreading, clinging and avoiding, the quotation can serve as the basis for all our recovery.

We turn and face our lives and we begin to look within. We are now on the right train. We become attuned to a deeper truth within us and we realize that all the things we feared which had become so big in our minds would be brought down to size when we sat still long enough.

We can all learn to sit still and this is the point of this missive. Stop running. Stop chasing. Stop complaining. Be still. Find your way to meditation and watch your life change for the better.

As Sadhvi told us, “No one ever died from sitting still.”

Sitting still is not just about our physical bodies, however. In fact, our minds can be winning the race of madness even while we sit on our duff. My sister shared an experience she had several years ago while floating in her swimming pool. There she was—totally supported by the water and two pool floaties—listlessly being held up. Awareness snapped in and she noticed her mind jumping from subject to subject, like a searchlight looking for things to worry about, circumstances to fix, people to correct. Although all of her outer environment was providing her with the perfect opportunity to relax and enjoy, her internal habit patterns were stuck on high alert, robbing her of the very bliss she was in the midst of.

This same habit pattern can seep in to and destroy relationships. Relationships are the fertile soil in which your personality is growing up. It has some catching up to do with the soul. Previous editions of the Beyond Mastery Newsletter have addressed Gary Zukav’s idea of Spiritual Partnerships. Like all relationships, these relationships are not free of challenges. The distinction is how challenges can be navigated skillfully allowing both people to come into true harmony. The result is connection that is in tune, relaxed, and just plain fun.

If you currently find yourself robbed of the genuine bliss of your relationship/s, rather than just being in relationship, you might be experiencing an entanglement.

You might be in an entanglement if:

   1. You keep having the same issues.
   2. You don’t feel safe or understood.
   3. Someone always needs to be right.
   4. It’s just so hard.

So what if you have the terrible feeling that you’re in an entanglement right now, or that you’ve been in entanglements before? Entanglements can be transformed to enlightenment!

According to relationship experts, Kathlyn and Gay Hendricks, you can relax and realize what you are experiencing is completely normal. Most people have been in an entanglement, and a lot of us have been in many. Humans frequently inadvertently drag past pain into the present destroying peace. Within that pain is a growth opportunity! Check out the tips in “Are You in a Fake Relationship?” to discover what you can do:

Identify that you’re in an entanglement.

Knowing whether you’re in a pattern of entanglement is key to resolving it once and for all. Otherwise, there’s a “blind spot” that keeps you from moving forward, and you’re doomed to keep repeating the pain and struggle.

End the entanglement or transform it into a real relationship.

Once you know you’re dealing with an entanglement, you can harness all that energy you’ve been spending on conflict, and instead use it to come up with creative solutions. You can transform the entanglement into a real relationship, or you can end the entanglement with peace of mind, armed with the insight you need to create love and harmony in the future.

This past winter, I had the opportunity to join a poetry group. At each meeting the group leader, Gail Berreitter, shares a different poetry form. One of our assignments was “Found Poems” where you take existing texts and refashion them, reorder them, and present them as poems. A sort of literary equivalent of a collage, “found” poetry is often made from newspaper articles, street signs, graffiti, speeches, letters, or even other poems.

As a sort of poetic prayer for my loved ones, I took a quotation from Presence, Kindness, and Freedom and wrote a found poem. Published in my recent blog post titled Life’s Squalls, the foundation for “No Problems” comes from Barbara Brodsky, my meditation teacher:

No Problems

Certainly
there are issues
that need to be resolved
you can relate to them in loving ways.
First, know that
there aren’t problems
just situations
asking us for our loving attention.
If you are
willing to risk,
be undefended
in a place of pain and with open hearts
to these
difficulties
there is no “problem”
nothing negative, just a call for love.

by Debra Basham 2/24/2017

I appreciated the view of Kathlyn and Gay that every relationship is ripe with unresolved issues from our past. It is as though we are looking now to our partners to make us feel good about ourselves related to our own past hurts. Essentially, because we have found love, we can also experience pain and frustration.

Pain and frustration do not prove that we’ve chosen the wrong partner. We are each attending what Gary Zukav calls earth school. We are all learning to nurture our own soul. As written in my found poem, now we see it is just a call for love!

Relationships have certainly been written about for aeons. When relationships are challenging, disenchantment can occur. Perhaps the root cause of disenchantment had been that humans are also learning to sit still. Thankfully, as Sadhvi said, “No one ever died from sitting still.”

Cognitive Dissonance in Relationships

A long time ago (1957), a social psychologist named Leon Festinger wrote about the human need to resolve “cognitive dissonance,” the clash between alternative thoughts and emotions, the clash between something labeled “good” and something labeled “bad.”

Festinger described the basic hypotheses of cognitive dissonance as follows:

1. The existence of dissonance [or inconsistency], being psychologically
    uncomfortable, will motivate the person to try to reduce the
    dissonance and achieve consonance [or consistency].

2. When dissonance is present, in addition to trying to reduce it, the person
    will actively avoid situations and information which would likely increase
    the dissonance.[57]

Dissonance reduction can be achieved by changing behavior, changing cognition, or selectively acquiring new information or opinions. To use Festinger’s example of a smoker who has knowledge that smoking is bad for his health, the smoker may reduce dissonance by choosing to quit smoking, by changing his thoughts about the effects of smoking (e.g., smoking is not as bad for your health as others claim), or by acquiring knowledge pointing to the positive effects of smoking (e.g., smoking prevents weight gain).[58]

Smoking provides a pretty clear example of how someone might resolve the dissonance caused by the conflict between enjoying a particular behavior but not wanting to experience the logical consequences of continuing the behavior. Before Festinger came up with the idea for cognitive dissonance, the common expression was “on the one hand, X, but on the other hand Y.” It’s in the language, but people aren’t inclined to say, “Gee, I’m experiencing cognitive dissonance.” My grandmother used to refer to the concept of wanting to “have your cake but eat it, too.” That saying refers to having to choose between two incompatible desirables, but if you are stuck between a rock and a hard place, neither choice is good.

When two individuals in a relationship have different desires, both experience cognitive dissonance that needs to be reduced if the relationship is to continue. As a simple example, consider something as “easy” as deciding what to have for dinner: One person wants “Chinese.” The other wants “Mexican.” While making that decision on any particular evening is probably not going to lead to divorce, the failure to establish equity in making of dinner decisions, could easily do so. People will accept the short end of the stick on occasion, but most balk at accepting it all the time. This example depends, of course, on time and place. In previous generations, the husband almost always got his way. At work, the “boss” usually gets his or her way. In some cultures, men usually get their way. The way decisions are made reflect the relative power of those involved the process. In most cases, the individuals involved never question the underlying morality of the social power structures that lead to such decisions.

For the most part, culture and social conditioning establish behavioral expectations. When the vast majority of relationships were established in previous times, men and women would have grown up in the same culture and would have had the same basic expectation for “what a man does” and “what a woman does.” A history of cultural expectations tends to reduce cognitive dissonance associated generally accepted behaviors. When cultures change quickly in unexpected ways, cognitive dissonance skyrockets. Think about what things were like in the US after Lincoln wrote the Emancipation Proclamation. The bitter feelings still run pretty deep in some individuals. Giving women the right to vote, Women’s Suffrage, also produced significant cognitive dissonance for many (although I don’t think there were any lynchings). Also consider what we have been witnessing this past election cycle, with the fears generated by “true believers” on both sides. Would you believe that this last election cycle has led Republicans and Democrats to hate each other?

Whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, you have probably lost at least one friend because of the cognitive dissonance generated by differences in political affiliation. This isn’t the first time in US history this has happened, of course. If you are old enough, you can probably remember the turmoil created by the Vietnam War, with the rallying cry of, “Hey, hey, LBJ. How many kids did you kill today?” The conflict was easily as bitter as what we are experiencing today, and individuals did what they could to reduce their cognitive dissonance. In those days, much like today, we associated primarily with those who shared our political views.

It’s easy to see cognitive dissonance at work when you consider such major cultural conflicts. The same kinds of conflicts, however, occur between (and among) any two (or more) people in any relationship, and especially in close, male-female relationships. And it’s not just what to have for dinner, although certainly dietary differences cause plenty of cognitive dissonance. In most relationships, dissonance can be reduced by “taking turns,” whether “this week Chinese; next week Mexican,” or going to a restaurant that offers both options. As is easy to see in politics, the most serious difficulties occur when those involved are not satisfied with personal decisions but insist that others make the same decision, as in the case of abortion: Not only don’t I want one, you’re not going to be allowed to have one, either. It is, of course, comparatively easy for a man to say No to having an abortion.

Even when the issues are comparatively small and personal, such as who sleeps on which side of the bed, or the proper temperature for home heating and cooling, cognitive dissonance can and will occur. A long time ago I was teaching a master’s level class in business communication in which one of my students asked a question about the way her “friends” had changed. She had lived in one location where she had established close relationships with a group of people through high school and undergraduate college work. She moved away to take a job. Three years later, she went back home very much looking forward to reuniting with those who had been her friends. They didn’t want to have anything to do with her. She said, “I still thought about them the same way” and asked “Why did they change?” When she asked them what had happened, the reply was basically, “You didn’t call. You didn’t write.” The rest of the class and I understood what had happened.” Cognitive dissonance occurs over time and place as well as between people in the same time and place.

My sense is that cognitive dissonance is always present to a greater or lesser degree when people interact. Reasonable people are better able to compromise than those who insist, My way or the highway. For this reason, we need to be aware of our own lines in the sand and those of others, especially those who are close to us.

Three Syllables

Do not be dismayed by the brokenness of the world.
All things break.
And all things can be mended.
Not with time… as they say.
But with intention.
So… Go.
Love intentionally, extravagantly, unconditionally.
The broken world waits in darkness
for the light that is you.

~ L. R. Knost
(from the Brahma Kumaris Thought for the day March 4, 2017)

Tenacity is such an amazing concept. To love intentionally, extravagantly, and unconditionally requires tenacious resolve. I recall stretching out on the floor of the skyroom at the Holistic Alliance after lunching during an NLP intensive, and fondly listening to Richard Bandler’s Personal Enhancement 6 CD set. I especially loved the one titled “Tenacious Resolve.” Synonyms for the word tenacious include: persistence, determination, perseverance, strength of purpose, resolve, steadfastness, and patience, just to list a few.

It certainly took tenacity for Zan Lombardo, artist extraordinaire, to complete her 30-foot watercolor painting. The painting (shown here at The Art Gallery at Franklin Commons in Phoenixville, Pennsylvania) is truly amazing, as is Zan.

From Zan’s website:

This is my 30-foot watercolor. It took me two years to draw and two years to paint, in little increments; 30 minutes while the laundry tumbled, 10 minutes while the pasta boiled.

(This poem is written along the bottom of the 30’ watercolor. Calligraphy in uncial font by Sheila Waters.)

EVERYTHING IS INDEED REACHING OUT TO EVERYTHING ELSE

Arcs of arms are reaching out from distant
Suns whose gestures stir the life of seeds.
To be here, now, requires our hearts to listen,
Watch, and know that Light fulfills our needs.

When gripped by stagnant vines of fear, relief
Springs from the pulsing centers of our chests.
False boundaries dissolve in prayer; peace weaves
The seeming chaos into something blessed.

Stay rooted. Stand witness. Be upholding.
Guidance from great Mother Oak whose limbs
Will move ours to join the sacred dance, singing
Aloud that work is love made visible.

Roused by poetic muse of rainbow voice,
What stirs us also presses us against
The thick embranglement of choice
In which our spirits rise and fall, unfenced.

One truth: that drawn by gravity and awe,
The world is in relationship with all.
-Zan Lombardo, 2011

Isn’t that how life is? We must capture, contemplate, and create the extraordinary right in the midst of the mundane.

That has certainly been the story of Debra, Joel, and SCS.

This winter, I have been sashaying with my shadow around stagnant vines of fear, as Zan would say. I finally managed to make a phone call to a man I felt had treated me unfairly. In my mind, I had pictured him conniving—going to all lengths—to stand in my way. I was at least honest enough with both of us to tell him I was calling to ask if he had done what I had already considered him guilty of. His answer was, “No.”

Zan’s painting is truly incredible, but the sharing of why and how these mystical and magical colors and shapes and images came to be is what moved me to tears. She was teaching when her work load was doubled and her prep time was cut in half. She ordered the 30-foot roll of artist paper because she wanted a safe place to go so she would not spend the last ten years of her teaching career bitter. In four-foot sections of paper and mere moments of time, as she created that safe place for herself, universal images and themes emerged.

What does it mean for you to know the truth that we can choose to not be bitter even when circumstances warrant bitterness? Relationships can trip us up. I read this quotation by an Armenian-Russian writer of fantasy and science fiction, Vera Nazarian, “Was it you or I who stumbled first? It does not matter. The one of us who finds the strength to get up first, must help the other.”

Zan shared the poem (the painting’s thirty-foot title) was complete, save for ten syllables in the very center. Underneath the skyward branches of the majestic tree which anchors the center of the painting, Zan’s friend said, “I was given a message for you. ‘Stand witness, be upholding’.”

Zan counted the syllables. One, two, three… seven syllables.

“I need three more syllables,” she confessed.

“Native Americans say if you have a question, you can put your forehead against a tree and you will get an answer,” her friend continued to breathe wisdom into the air that hung poetically between them.

Zan leaned her forehead against the tree. “Stay rooted.”

Three syllables.

Stay rooted. Stand witness. Be upholding.

What Ships Are Built For

In 1928 John A. Shedd published a collection of sayings (“Salt from My Attic”) that included the following saying, “A ship in harbor is safe, but that is not what ships are built for.” You may also be familiar with the saying, “Any port in a storm.” The recently recovered audio tapes from the El Faro that was lost at sea in 2015, clearly illustrate how risky the ocean can be even for experienced sailors. The Shedd quotation is often used to encourage people to take more risks and to discourage “playing it safe.” Progress occurs because people take chances, and not all chances pay off.

Our ancestors who went down to the sea in ships were willing to take extraordinary chances in the hopes of extraordinary rewards. They were, after all, in sailing vessels much smaller than either El Faro or the Titanic. Some of the rewards they were seeking were, of course, financial. Others went to sea primarily to learn more about what was “out there.” Charles Darwin, for example, wanted to learn more about the species with whom we share the planet. And he was not the only one curious about the world. The time between the early fifteenth century and the end of the eighteenth century became known as the Age of Discovery. During this time, the Europeans set sail on what became a global quest, not only to see what was “there,” but also for wealth. I am not sure why the extensive exploration of the world was dominated by the Europeans instead of the Asians, but I suspect it has something to do with the inherent differences in philosophical orientation between East and West.

To say that the different attitudes toward exploration resulted from the West having adopted Science while Mysticism dominated Eastern thought would not be fully correct. Nor would it be fully correct to say that those in the West prayed, while those in the East meditated. My guess is that those differences are, however, based on a fundamental difference in philosophical orientation. At this point, science has overtaken Asian thought to the same degree as it has Western thought. All things considered, those from the East and those from the West aren’t that different. Most of those reading this article will be more familiar with European history than with Asian history, but those histories have more similarities than differences. The Medieval period, for example, was marked by numerous wars in both Asia and Europe. Class distinctions were also similar, with strong divisions between royalty and peasants. In both East and West it took a long time before a “merchant” class emerged, forming the foundation for what is now considered the Middle Class.

Political systems were slow to evolve. In the West, we look to the Magna Carta as the beginning of the end of the absolute authority of monarchs. The poet William Blake said, For the Eye altering alters all. We gain perspective when we travel, regardless of our mode of transportation. I suspect that the saying applies to time as much as it does to space. We (including those we consider “less evolved”) are not the same people our ancestors were. Our sensibilities have changed because we know more. In general, the more you know, the less you fear. We tend to be more afraid of the unknown than we are of the known. That doesn’t mean, of course, that any of us would be glad to wrestle a grizzly bear or otherwise engage in risky behaviors. A long time ago, my parents came from California to visit me and my family one very snowy Christmas in Michigan. There was quite a bit of snow on the streets when my father and I went out to run a couple of errands. For me, driving on the snow had become relatively normal. However, I thought my father was going to jump out of his skin every time I turned a corner or came to a stop sign. Driving on snow and ice was an “unknown” for my father, so he had no way of knowing how hard it might be to turn a corner or stop.

The familiar is comfortable, whereas the new is not. The old saying is, Better the devil you know than the one you don’t. But that’s not what ships are built for. We need to remember that we are on a metaphorical ship, and our only real choice is whether we chose to set sail or simply stay in the harbor. Life will be more interesting if you choose to set sail.

Understanding Mohini

If you’re depressed, you’re living in the past.
If you’re anxious, you’re living in the future.
If you’re at peace, you’re living in the present.

Lao Tzu (Laozi), ancient Chinese philosopher and writer

We have been teaching this concept in SCS (energy medicine and linguistics) for decades, but I did not know the awareness of how emotions are related to our orientation in time was shared by Lao Tzu in ancient times. This idea is the basis for the Emotional Freedom audio. It makes me wonder how much other truth we are just now noticing that has been around. Perhaps we are all conditioned, much like Mohini.

Mohini, a white tiger, lived in a zoo. For many years her home was limited to a cage. She ate, slept, and paced in her twelve-by-twelve foot space.

Even after the zoo created a large natural habitat for her—complete with rolling hills, mature trees, and a pond—Mohini lived the remainder of her life pacing in one small 12X12 corner.

Everyone was shocked at her foolish programmed behavior, but are humans that much different? Learning about timelines (See Healing with Language: Your Key to Effective Mind-Body Communication, Bowman and Basham) and verb tenses really does empower you to help others and to help yourself. Awareness of the significant impact language has on our behavior is key!

When people are experiencing a problem—a stuck state—they often use an all-encompassing present tense: “I can’t learn new things” or “my supervisor is a jerk.” Notice what happens when the verb tense changes. “Learning new things has been difficult,” or “my supervisor has been a jerk.”

When a person seems “stuck” in a state or in the experience of a problem, he or she will often use a simple verb tense: “I am depressed.” Simply changing the verb to a progressive tense may help the individual see him- or herself as moving through a particular state or problem: “So you have been feeling depressed.”

We can all listen for the verb tenses people use when talking about their problems. We can skillfully use verb tenses to help others move problems into the past and solutions into the present and the future.

It is also helpful to think about the way you can use your knowledge of timelines and verb tenses to better understand your own problems and/or find appropriate solutions.

Remember that the universal present tense exists through time. When you say that something or someone is, by implication the tense includes past, present, and future: “I am depressed” or “Bob is a jerk.” Shifting to the past tense helps move the problem into the past: “I was depressed.” Using the past tense for such expressions also helps limit the context in other ways: “Bob was being a jerk when. . . .”

While in many ways our mammalian brain allows us, like Mohini, to live our lives captive by our own past experiences, we also have a human brain and you can step free from the trances that have limited your freedom. Freedom is possible!

This Page of Water [Understanding] card from the Osho Zen Tarot Transcendental Game of Zen deck speaks to the climate of freedom that is our true nature.

Tara Brach calls this unfolding the wings of acceptance. In Radical Acceptance: Embracing Your Life with the Heart of A Buddha, she writes, “When we are caught in the trance of unworthiness, we do not clearly recognize what is happening inside us, nor do we feel kind. Our view of who we are is contorted and narrowed and our heart feels hardened against life.” (p. 27)

I love these additional words from the commentary on the Understanding card, too:

You are out of jail, out of the cage; you can open your wings and the whole sky is yours. All the stars and moon and the sun belong to you. You can disappear into the blueness of the beyond…. Just drop clinging to this cage, move out of the cage and the whole sky is yours. Open your wings and fly across the sun like and eagle. In the inner sky, the inner world, freedom is the highest value—everything else is secondary, even blissfulness, ecstasy. There are thousands of flowers, uncountable, but they all become possible in the climate of freedom.

By living in the reality of this climate of freedom, we notice our thoughts. We take responsibility for our emotional reactions and change our lives. We do not have to live our lives like we were in a cage. We have the opportunity to enjoy the freedom that is ours.

Changing the verb itself is a very smart way to alter the interpretation of a statement of limitation. Consider using feel for conditions you wish to be temporary and am for conditions you want to be permanent. “I feel tired.” “I am confident.” “I feel lonely.” “I am capable of enjoying friends and family.”

I feel sad that Mohini died not knowing she was free to roam her new habitat, but I am excited that we know the sky is the limit because freedom is our true nature.

The Skinner Box Called Life

Debra’s article this month, “Mohini,” provides an example of learned behavior. Having learned how much space she was allowed, Mohini remained within her learned limits, even when more space was available to her. Behavior is often developed—shaped—by environment. Humans demonstrate this every bit as much as tigers and other animals. B. F. Skinner was a behavioral psychologist best known for creating the Skinner Box, designed for shaping behavior through Operant Conditioning.

Those of us who have owned dogs have doubtless used operant conditioning, both rewards and punishments, to shape the behavior of our dogs. If we’re consistent in providing rewards (punishments are not required), we can teach them to come, sit, stand, stay, and a variety of other things by rewarding some behaviors and not others. This works especially for dogs because they are pack animals and tend to do what the pack leader desires. Cats are not pack animals, so they can’t be easily trained with praise. The will, however, respond to operant conditioning as long as they are rewarded with something they really like. While dogs pay attention to “negative reinforcement” (punishment) because pack leaders will punish behavior they don’t like, cats can’t readily be trained with punishment. They have a “get even” mentality, and peeing on your favorite furniture is one of the ways they enjoy getting even….

When it comes to learning, humans have a huge advantage over other animals. Adult animals teach their offspring of course. Young ones typically stay with mom until they are old enough to survive on their own. Mom shows them what’s safe and what isn’t, where and how to find food, and how to navigate their territory. In primitive times, humans did essentially the same. We generally lived in groups for reasons of safety and efficiency. Parents and other elders passed accumulated knowledge on to children. We still do basically the same thing, but we have become more efficient at it because we have learned to disseminate information in a wide variety of ways. In primitive times, children could learn only what the tribe knew. We now have all sorts of printed information available, TV, movies, and computer-based information exchange. Communication gives us a major advantage not available to Mohini: We can learn from other individuals and other cultures. Mohini didn’t have another tiger available to say, “Hey, Mohini, this whole area is yours to explore now.”

The increased ability to exchange information also has a downside. What do we do about those who are different from us? Throughout history, the answer as typically been war: tribal warfare, racial warfare, territorial warfare, cultural warfare, and religious warfare. I suspect other kinds of warfare as well. In “Hamlet,” Shakespeare says that Fortinbras is willing to go to war over “an eggshell.” It isn’t always easy, of course, to know what makes something valuable to another. Shakespeare doesn’t tell us the Norwegian’s motivation for going to war against Poland, but we do know what Medieval warfare was like. Here in the States we have just had the most contentious election in a long time. Democrats and Republicans have been at each other’s throats, not only with a war of words, but also with some physical violence. The irony is that most of those on both sides want the same things for themselves and their families. But pack animals, and humans are essential pack animals, tend to do what the pack leader dictates.

Humans have been conditioned to follow one pack leader or another, so we are a lot like Mohini. We are free to choose alternatives, but “what we know is what we know,” and it is difficult to choose an unknown. You may have seen recent news stories indicating that the George Orwell’s “1984” are up. My sense is that increasing numbers of people are aware that something out of the ordinary is going on, even if they aren’t quite sure what, and even if they don’t yet know what to do about it. We may indeed be in the Skinner Box of life, but once we have figured that out, we will have a better idea of how we might avoid letting old conditioning control our behavior.

Actions Speak Louder than Words

The idea that actions are “high quality” communication has been around a long time. The old saying is that “actions speak louder than words.” You’ve also doubtless hear people say, “Put your money where your mouth is.” What people do is usually considered a better indication of what they are thinking than their words suggest. Sometimes, the difference between what people say and what they do is obvious: A person might say, “Trust me. I will be there at 9 tomorrow morning,” when he or she has no intention of being there at all. Or a person might intend to be there but show up a little late. Or a lot late. Or simply not show at all. It’s also been said that, “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.”

When people actually do something that conveys a message, such as Colin Kaepernick’s refusal to stand for the National Anthem before football games, people don’t always equate the action with the words that would convey the same idea. Many who would readily agree with him if he said, “Black people aren’t treated fairly in this country,” complain about his “disrespect” for the flag and the country it represents. His engaging in the “speech act” of not standing is the idea behind the saying, Put your Money where your mouth is. The idea here is, if you really believe what you are saying, do something that proves it. Kaepernick wanted people to pay attention to what he was saying, so he took action to make his point.

During the Revolutionary War, Thomas Paine referred to summer soldiers and sunshine patriots, who served in the Continental Army only when it was convenient. The behavior of the summer soldiers indicated that they were not fully committed to the cause of defeating the British. People can and do, of course, change their minds based on what seems important at the moment. Ralph Waldo Emerson famously said, A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. Thomas Paine and George Washington were focusing on the long-term need to defeat the British, and the summer soldiers were divided between their desire to defeat the British and their need to be back at the farm to take care of planting and harvesting the crops. They wanted to defeat the British, but they also wanted their farms to do well. Both serving as soldiers in the summer and returning to the farm to tend to the fields are “speech acts.” The coming and going of the part-time soldiers communicated both priorities. To fully understand the behavior of the summer soldiers, you have to recognize their conflicting needs and desires. A single act is not enough, but actions over time indicate choices that form the basis of “character.”

With the “summer soldiers” of the Revolutionary War and Colin Kaepernick’s refusal to stand for the National Anthem, we see that speech acts catch attention and influence both opinion and behavior. While most of us will never engage in speech acts that will influence public opinion, our behavior—what we do—says a lot about what we value and whether others can trust us. In terms of our own relationships, others relate to us based on accumulated experience. The more experience we have with another, the more accurate our perception. If your only interaction with a person was a nasty argument, that experience might result in a frozen evaluation, an opinion difficult to change. Longer term relationships usually provide varied experiences, some good and some not so good. Marriages usually last as long as the perception of “good” outweighs the perception of “bad.” When the “bad” outweighs the “good,” a marriage will end. The final “negative” is often called the last strawthe straw that broke the camel’s back.

Individuals in a relationship, of course, have different thresholds for the point at which something becomes “the last straw.” One of the things that makes relationships difficult is that we never know from day to day or week to week where our own “point of no return” might be, let alone the other person’s. We can go along thinking everything is perfectly OK only to discover when it is too late that the other person’s load of straw had become excessive. In general, when we are well-rested and healthy, we can carry more “baggage.” We have all seen that with children: when they are well-rested and -fed, their dispositions tend to be good. When they are tired and hungry, every little thing sets them off. What we don’t often recognize is that the same is also true for adults. An adult who is tired and/or hungry will have a “shorter fuse” than one who is well-rested and -fed.

February, the shortest month of the year in the Christian calendar, is the month during which we celebrate Valentine’s Day, usually by exchanging token gifts with the person we consider “our Valentine.” The token gifts, whether something physical (flowers, jewelry, etc.) or “speech acts” (going out to dinner or to the theater) are designed to demonstrate feelings. A long time ago Ann Landers said, The only two people who know what’s true about a relationship are the two people in it—and sometimes one of them doesn’t know. While there’s wisdom in that concept, it misses the point that the relationship is different for each of the people in it.

Perhaps this February, not only on Valentine’s Day but before and after as well, you might spend some time thinking about your relationships, past, present and “still possible.” That’s not always easy. It’s much easier to see the mote in the other person’s eye than it is to see the beam in your own. And as you think about your relationships this month, that’s probably a good place to start. How is the “beam” in your eye contributing to or detracting from the quality of your relationships? That would probably be different, of course, for each of your significant relationships. A woman once told me that I was “nicer to the dog” than I was to her. She was right. At the same time, however, the dog was nicer to me than she usually was. One of the basic truths is that we tend to reap what we sow. This is not to say that changing what you sow will change the nature of your relationships, but it is the best—and only—place to start.

Relationships and SCS/NLP


Choose your love. Love your choice. ~ Thomas S. Monson

February has long been celebrated as a month of romance. As we know it today, St. Valentine’s Day contains vestiges of both Christian and ancient Roman tradition, so it seems only appropriate to write about love for the February Beyond Mastery Newsletter. In Radical Acceptance, Tara Brach reports a phenomenon that plays a part in the love story for most—maybe all—Westerners:

Several years ago a small group of Buddhist teachers and psychologists from the United States and Europe invited the Dalai Lama to join them in a dialogue about emotions and health. During one of their sessions an American vipassana teacher asked him to talk about the suffering of self-hatred. A look of confusion came over the Dalai Lama’s face. “What is self-hatred?” he asked. As the therapists and teachers in the room tried to explain, he looked increasingly bewildered. “Was this mental state a nervous disorder?” he asked them. When those gathered confirmed that self-hatred was not unusual but rather a common experience for their students and clients, the Dalai Lama was astonished. How could they feel that way about themselves, he wondered when “everybody has Buddha nature.” (Tara Brach, Ph.D,Radical Acceptance: Embracing Your Life With the Heart of a Buddha, pg. 11)

Brach goes on to comment that while all humans feel ashamed of weakness and afraid of rejection, our Western culture is a breeding ground for the kind of shame and self-hatred the Dalai Lama couldn’t comprehend.

Shame and self-hatred are played out over and over between men and women, from the bedroom to the boardroom. It is not just romantic relationships that are adversely affected by unrealized and unreleased inappropriate shame. Professional partnerships can be battle the ground for our wounded egos. Those who have trained with SCS likely witnessed Joel’s and my struggles. Working together rendered us as insecure as teenagers in love. We often argued like an old married couple.

My Internet search for “relationships” produced about 677,000,000 results.

We see evidence of the dynamics of puffed up egos fed by shadow shame and self-hatred playing itself out in politics, too, but I will not go there right now.

Some of the tools in the SCS/NLP materials provide valuable insight for relating. Recognizing common metaprograms, for example. If metaprograms are new to you, read more in Healing with Language: Your Key to Effective Mind-Body Communication. It is our comprehensive training manual based on the foundation laid by Korzybski, Erickson, and others (including Virginia Satir, Fritz Perls, Gregory Bateson, and Paul Watzlawick). The foundational tools were codified into Neurolinguistic Programming primarily by Richard Bandler and John Grinder. Others—such as Robert Dilts, Judith DeLozier, and Steve and Connirae Andreas, were also among the early contributors. We have elected to do advanced study of NLP with Richard Bandler and John La Valle with The Society of NLP. (See Healing with Language)

If you would appreciate a free copy of Healing with Language: Your Key to Effective Mind-Body Communication, email debra@scs-matters.com. I will tell you where you can pick up a copy, or I will send a copy anywhere in the continental US for the cost of postage.

But back to the topic of this newsletter…. If a matcher is relating with a mismatcher, a sense of being out of phase is likely to be very common. Metaprograms tend to operate through time and across contexts, influencing behavior in a wide variety of ways. A principal cause of interpersonal conflict is that we all tend to assume that others use the same metaprograms that we do. When we discover otherwise, we tend to think that the other person’s behavior is wrong, or that something is wrong with us.

One of the most important applications of the confirmation metaprogram is knowing how you know that someone loves you. It may be even more important for you to know what kind of information someone else needs to be convinced that you love him or her. Most people assume that others, especially a spouse or significant other, share their confirmation metaprograms. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Differences in the sensory modality or frequency of evidence is a major cause of interpersonal difficulty and the source of numerous jokes. Like the one about the man and woman divorcing after 75 years of marriage. When the judge asked why, the wife said, “In 75 years of marriage he has not even once said he loves me.” In answer to the accusation, the man simply stated he told her he loved her the day he proposed and had not changed his mind!

What we need or what we offer might seem reasonable to us but leave the other adrift in the sea of self-doubt.

While we all experience the world of love using our senses, which (assuming that we have all of them) include vision, hearing, touch, smell, and taste, we each have our preferred systems. Different preferred sensory systems also result in misunderstanding when unrecognized for what they are. People who process primarily auditorily use those words: hear, listen, resonate. Visuals ask you to look, to be clear, to imagine. Linguistic preferences can result in devastating relationship dynamics. A simple miscommunication of “Are you listening to me?” or “Why can’t you see things my way?” can trigger buried toxic shame.

We not only have a preferred sensory system, but we have a system we are least aware of. That system, unrecognized, can be the source of triggered feelings.

In Radical Acceptance, Brach quotes Mother Teresa’s insight after a lifetime of working with the poor and the sick. “The biggest disease today is not leprosy or tuberculosis but rather the feeling of not belonging.” This feeling of not belonging is worsened by the shadow of shame and is difficult to address until it is recognized for what it is: a result of our upbringing.

Many of us grew up in imperfect families. We may have not had sufficient nurturing. I did not see my mother and father kiss until after I was married. Granted, I married young, but you get my point. Our families may have moved, uprooting our sense of community at crucial developmental stages. We were likely not blessed to be raised by a village, secure in the fact that we were loved not only by our parents and siblings but by an entire “tribe.”

Janice Clark said, “I don’t think you’re suddenly going to begin to look at the world with new eyes when you’re 80 if you haven’t been doing it when you’re 30.” Days and weeks or months and years unfold into a lifetime of communicating through hidden shame, resulting in patterns of relating that lead individuals to conclude things about a relationship that is not really about the relationship at all.

For years, I suffered silent feelings of inferiority to Joel. He was the college professor. I was the high school dropout. We projected lots of unhealed childhood wounds onto one another. We played out painful dramas. We blamed one another and ourselves for the failure to launch SCS Matters into the success we knew it was deserving of and the world could benefit from.

The past few years Joel and I have not been formally teaching together but we have continued to maintain a commitment to one another and to SCS. We have done that through our web presence. We reach out to each of those who studied with us in ways that is doable for this phase, and we welcome new connections.

I publish “Debra’s Wellness Tips,” “Wholesome Thougths,” and “Sacred Stories” each week. If you are not already receiving these, you can sign up at DebraBasham.com. We have been publishing the “Beyond Mastery Newsletter,” both contributing articles, since September 2006. You can read past articles in the archives. We each blog. You can sign up to receive our blog posts automatically from the homepage at SCS-Matters.com.

Brach says we long to belong and feel like we don’t deserve to. Richard Bandler says the best thing about the past is that it is over. Maybe Janice Clark does not know the truth that with SCS/NLP it is never too late to have a happy childhood and there is always time to live happily ever after.

May this month of love lead each of us to a deeper sense of radical acceptance so we can enjoy all of our relationships, especially the one within…

Let's Laugh

After having my blood pressure be relatively stable since August after it spiked in May of this year, it spiked again last week. I am once again surrendering to the release of old emotional patterns. (You may appreciate reading my earlier blog post if this is news to you: Three Days Without Anxiety Medication.)

I am not feeling anxiety so much as just aware of an inner state of stress. Dr. Jane Oelke used The Emotion Code to help me identify the hidden cause/s of this current state of being revved up. The Emotion Code uses kinesiology (muscle testing) to connect to the subconscious mind to find out where the blockages are and what emotions they are related to. Then a magnet is rolled over the corresponding body meridians several times to release those emotional energy blockages. Three major areas showed up: a feeling of vulnerability that was inherited from my paternal great-grandmother, the sense of not feeling supported by my husband in 2009, and an overall feeling of being peeved. My body is helping me acknowledge that buried emotions are a very serious situation.

I have been pouring through journal entries from 2009. Journal writing helps me not hide from my shadow. I am reading my past rants and raves and witnessing my understandable desire for things to have been different than they were and better than they are. I witness with compassion the desperate feeling that getting things turned around was all up to me.

In the midst of my letting go, what a blessing to watch Let’s Laugh Our Way to Enlightenment, a talk by Barbara Marx Hubbard. Barbara has been called “the voice for conscious evolution…” by Deepak Chopra. She is the subject of Neale Donald Walsch’s book The Mother of Invention. And many would agree she is the global ambassador for conscious change. This paragraph is from Barbara’s website:

At her heart, Barbara Marx Hubbard is a visionary, a social innovator. She is an evolutionary thinker who believes that global change happens when we work collectively and selflessly for the greater good. She realizes that the lessons of evolution teach us that problems are evolutionary drivers, and crises precede transformation, giving a new way of seeing and responding to our global situation.

One thing becomes very clear—we could laugh more. Here are some of my notes from that talk: Laughter is the gateway. Laughter forces us into, seduces us into, demands that we be in, anchors us in the now. Laughter hold the largest truths paradoxically. The garden of Eden is not true, it is paradox. Laughter stimulates feel good hormones. Laughter brackets your ego so you begin to see from a clearer place. Laughter facilitates the field of collective intelligence. Laughter releases what we need to let go of so we can see clearly.
Barbara clarifies the point that she is not talking about forced laughter. She is talking about the laughter that arises spontaneously from genuine joy. She says our joy enhances perception—and the soul is a faculty of perception.

The impulse of evolution in me and in us has a frequency of God intelligence particularly when you say yes to it…. God has an internal joy of wanting to create creators…. So when I laugh, God’s laughing inside me. When you laugh, God’s laughing inside you. God feels our laughter just as God feels our tears. God sits and laughs on high. When we laugh, we feel the divine voice saying, “Yes!”

This is certainly the key. When I was guest pastor at Pilgrim Congregational Church on December 4, 2016, I expressed a wish for all humans to feel/sense/know our divinity and to mirror the divinity back to others in the world.

Joel also watched the talk on laughter, and while he has appreciated Barbara Marx Hubbard’s books, and agreed with her points on laughter in this talk, he did not at all resonate with the man she was presenting with. Soon after I sent the talk to Joel, Joel forwarded a Wikipedia entry on Barbara’s co-presenter, Marc Gafni.

I felt the stress rise in my body as I read the information. Marc has been accused of sexual impropriety—on multiple occasions. For one thing, Joel has a very advanced BS detector. I could envy that. For another thing, we know that Wikipedia has an agenda. Everything we read online probably has an opposite point of view posted somewhere else online. That said, I know what I could feel in my body was a life-long (perhaps many lives long) core sense of guilt and shame. Those toxic emotions activated these toxic questions:

“What would people think if they knew everything I have ever done? Would the divine truth I am so passionate to share be discounted totally because of my past actions or inactions? Have people been harmed by my sins of commission or omission?”

We are now aware of the painful results of having grown up influenced by the theology of Original Sin. So, this inherited vulnerability, these shadow self-doubts, that old pattern of panic can be welcomed. These are the lies divine truth is willing to reveal!

We are blessed with this truth. This truth is reality worthy for our beginning the New Year. This truth is wonderful to live for the rest of our days. This is how the divine truth was channeled by Barbara Brodsky at retreat on November 13, 2016:

I am the one you have called Jeshua. I came in love for all beings. I did not suggest ever that people should suffer, or that people must suffer to reach a higher plane. My dear brother and friend Siddartha Gautama (note from Debra – this is the Buddha) also did not say that people should suffer, only that suffering is inevitable until you awaken and understand that nature of suffering. But why should you continue to suffer? I came to teach you love. Some of those who brought my teachings into a religion created the idea of sin. I did not come to save people from their sins. I came to remind all of you, that you already are awakened, that you also are the Christ. The word “Christ” means “awakened one,” and I came to remind you that you are that Awakened One; not to be a model put up on a pedestal, but to take your hands and walk with you and support you knowing your own truth of love. How could it be otherwise? You are love.

The rest of it is, as Aaron would say, mental objects, just ideas in your head, ideas that have been so deeply ingrained, that you have somehow a stain on you and you must do something special to eradicate that stain. You have all been in mud puddles, yes. You’re splashed all over with it. Get in the shower. It rinses right off. But if you think it has seeped into the skin so that you must use a scouring pad to scour it off then you will bleed, there will be pain, and that is not what I came to share. The only answer is love.

My colleague and friend, Rabbi Rami Shapiro, writes a wonderful column in Spirituality and Health Magazine. Here is what Rami illuminates for us about sin:

You can live godly or ungodly, but God is unchanged. If you are “swimming” in an ungodly manner, you aren’t sinning against God or separate from God. You are simply working against your own best interest… No separation is possible; no return is necessary.

….Sinning against God is like trying to punch a wave; no matter how hard your strike, you can’t do any damage. Think in terms of swimming in the ocean. If you swim with the current, the ocean works with you. If you swim against it, the ocean works against you. While this matters greatly to you, it matters not all to the ocean. And regardless of which way you choose to swim, you are always in the ocean.

So, join me in totally letting go of any old programming. Any sin of the past was just it was punching waves.

Let go of guilt and shame. You might appreciate this EFT Tapping exercise that can help. Let go of old programming. Laughter is the sun that drives winter from the human face. Let’s laugh!

laughter-victor-hugo

Let's Cry

When I first read Debra’s article for January, “Let’s Laugh,” Aerosmith’s 1973 release, “Dream On,” started playing in my head—especially the line, “Sing for the laughter and sing for the tears.” What occurred to me is what would laughter be if there were no tears?



Here are the lyrics for those who like to have the complete context:

Every time that I look in the mirror
All these lines on my face getting clearer
The past is gone
It went by like dusk to dawn
Isn’t that the way
Everybody’s got their dues in life to pay

Well, I know nobody knows
Where it comes and where it goes
I know it’s everybody’s sin
You got to lose to know how to win

Half my life’s in books’ written pages
Live and learn from fools and from sages
You know it’s true
All the things come back to you

Sing with me sing for the years
Sing for the laughter and sing for the tears
Sing with me if it’s just for today
Maybe tomorrow the good Lord will take you away

The implication is that both laughter and tears are rooted in our mortality. We are aware we are alive, and that has both costs and benefits. The fancy name for this is mortality salience—from a fairly early age, humans are aware that they will die. It is not clear to what degree other mammals share this knowledge. Although other mammals don’t laugh or cry quite the way humans do, if you have opportunity to observe them carefully, you will catch them doing the equivalent of laughing or crying, typically in response to something physical. As far as we know, humans are the only ones who can “think” themselves into laughter or tears. We know that animals can remember and anticipate, but we don’t know the degree to which their cognitions influence their mood. Humans may be the only creatures whose internal life outweighs external circumstances.

In 1991, Karol K. Truman published Feelings Buried Alive Never Die…. The book explores the dynamic underpinnings of buried emotions. Laughter and tears are typically the expression of emotions that have been buried and are subsequently triggered by an event. When the buried emotions come to the “surface” of consciousness, we laugh or cry based on associated memories. The English poet William Wordsworth, said it this way: “To me the meanest flower that blows can give / Thoughts that do often lie too deep for tears. (For the complete poem, see Intimations of Immortality from Recollections of Early Childhood.

Everything, all our experiences from birth through whatever age we are now, adds up. The laughter and the tears are complementary. One doesn’t cancel the other out. They work together to provide us with a multidimensional perspective of Life. We know we are happy because of the way happiness contrasts with sadness, and we know we are sad because of our memories of happiness. As Debra said, “Laughter … anchors us in the now. The same, of course, is true for the tears of sadness. I think that both are necessary for our (yours, mine, everyone’s) evolving consciousness. In terms of our collective consciousness, we seem to be at a major pivot point in history.

We have been living in what might be called interesting times. We are beset by problems at all levels: local, national, and global. We also have unprecedented opportunities. Old technologies, based primarily on the exploitation of fossil fuels, are being replaced by “clean” technologies. We have numerous wars and other national and international conflicts resulting not only in death but also in massive migrations. In the States, we have just had an election that gave us who live here the opportunity to choose between the first woman candidate for that office and a celebrity business person with no real political expertise.

When you find yourself having thoughts that provoke laughter or tears, you are doing something uniquely human, and it is something you have in common with Socrates. At the same time, however, remember the words of a more modern philosopher, Jackson Browne, who provided musical insight into seeing too much evil and good:

Doctor My Eyes

Doctor, my eyes have seen the years
And the slow parade of fears without crying
Now I want to understand

I have done all that I could
To see the evil and the good without hiding
You must help me if you can

Doctor, my eyes
Tell me what is wrong
Was I unwise to leave them open for so long

‘Cause I have wandered through this world
And as each moment has unfurled
I’ve been waiting to awaken from these dreams
People go just where they will
I never noticed them until I got this feeling
That it’s later than it seems

Doctor, my eyes
Tell me what you see
I hear their cries
Just say if it’s too late for me

Doctor, my eyes
Cannot see the sky
Is this the prize for having learned how not to cry