Are You Thinking or Processing?

Surely, the mental energy you're giving current or old issues is accomplishing something, right? It depends on if you're thinking or processing.

When Bob Proctor and Leslie Householder met, he told her she was fairly balanced between right and left brain but was more of a creative type. She disagreed and informed him she was a math major, analytical, and that she constantly thought about her life and everything; that she was always in thinking mode. She admitted she was a processor. (Processing is when you hash out data and details, real and imaginary, whether to others or to yourself, more than once—often WAY more than once.) Bob responded: “You're not thinking. You're mind is busy; but you're not thinking.” Leslie said she, at first, wondered if she'd just been insulted then went on to process his comment for a year, until she could see the difference: “When you THINK, you create a NEW idea.”

A new idea. Not a rehashed old one. New means you've never thought of this particular “something” or thought of it in quite this way, or had this idea or seen whatever in this new light. Leslie added that Bob said her tendency to process instead of think was what prevented her desired positive changes from happening. And so it is for us all.

Shifting this can be a challenge because your mind may be well-practiced to replay and replay and replay (ad nauseum) what happened, how it might have gone (but didn't), a worse-case scenario, moments from the past, conversations you've had or wish you'd had or plan to have. And in all that mental activity, you never once focus on a new way to approach the issue or allow in an original idea.

You might also replay core beliefs and contrasts at the same time you strive to affirm new ones. Your conscious mind may affirm: “I attract/match my vibration with abundance, prosperity, and well-being.” Your subconscious, however, is attuned to deep-level programs running, evidenced by what you've experienced (your experiences “prove” something, don't they?). As author Barbara Berger points out, every thought you think is an affirmation. That should give us all pause.

The ego-aspect of your conscious mind says things like, “But, I don't see what I want right now. I want it yesterday. How long do I have to wait?!” or “I never have original ideas” and “EVERYTHING IS A STRUGGLE!” You begin to process, based on appearances, and your past, rather than think a new thought, which leads you to charge these thoughts with LOTS of emotion. Emotion is a signal you send out that gets matched with (attracts) an experience.

And your subconscious mind and the aspect of the spiritual Universe that manifests align with these thoughts you’re holding: “Okay; got it. You don't see what you want, even if it's in the room with you; and if IT is right outside your door, you'll keep the door closed. If it wasn't here yesterday, it's never coming. You want to know how long you have to wait. Let's find out how long because ‘Waiting’ and ‘Have Unlimited Access to It/Are It’ are two different programs (emotionally-charged feelings); and the one you believe more gets fulfilled. You're not open to receive original ideas, so we’ll replay old ones because that's what's available; and if we need to, we'll borrow thoughts and beliefs from others; because you never have original ideas. Everything is a struggle for you. I'll get to work on making sure you're proved right because I'm programmed to believe you are and act on it.” Yikes!

A new thought or idea comes to a calm mind, a mind open and receptive to new thoughts because it's uncluttered, free of the wasteful energy of processing and (gulp) panicking. This includes transforming an old idea that pops into mind into a new idea then charging it up with feeling it as your potential reality (it really could be). If your old thoughts haven't changed your reality experience yet, why not try new ones. What might happen if you thought about your life the way you prefer it to be?

Processing is wearing; it's exhausting. It tells you lies such as the ones listed above. I could say, “Hey, if you're going to lie to yourself, do it in your favor;” but you'd have to release processing and embrace thinking. And, you'd have to do this deliberately every time you head toward busy-mind rather than mindfulness.

One reason we struggle with this is demonstrated by a quote from Oliver Wendell Holmes: "The mind, once expanded to the dimensions of larger ideas, never returns to its original size." Your inner self knows what's described here is true. It also knows what it takes to make it true for you consistently: Practice. It's natural to be inclined to revert to the "usual" ways. But, once you've so much as entertained the idea of a new and better way, old ways no longer feel like a good fit: they cease to feel like a "comfort" zone. And, the idea that if you deliberately calm down and shift your energy, you create change or a more positive experience just seems ridiculous when you're stressed, even if you know what kind of results to expect if you follow the "usual" approach.

For the rest of today, pay attention to the conversations you have with yourself (and others). If you find that you slip into processing, pause and say to yourself, “Your mind is busy, but you're not thinking.” Higher awareness applied to anything creates different, improved experiences and results. If you've ever looked for a successful way to quiet your mind, this will help you do it. It’s a good practice, one you’ll appreciate.               

          

Practice makes progress.

© Joyce L. Shafer

You are welcome to use this article in your newsletter or on your blog/website as long as you use my complete bio with it.

Joyce L. Shafer is a Life Empowerment Coach dedicated to helping people feel, be, and live their true inner power. She’s author of “I Don’t Want to be Your Guru, But I Have Something to Say” and other books/e-books, and publishes a free weekly online newsletter that offers empowering articles. See all that’s offered by Joyce and on her site at http://stateofappreciation.weebly.com

Go With vs. Get into the Flow

“Go with the flow” was and still is a popular thing to say and attitude to have. But what about “Get into the flow”? Is there really a difference? I say yes.

I think there is a difference, or at least, I feel one at an inner level, so trust that feeling in how I relate to my experiences. For me, going with the flow represents a couple of attitudes. One attitude is when things are going a certain way and you flow with it, say, like instead of trying to control what happens at a dinner party or picnic, you just allow the experience to unfold and are in the now with whatever happens. Another go-with-the-flow attitude is when something happens that your ego-aspect wants to resist but you release the resistance. This doesn’t mean you don’t take action, if action is needed, but you quiet your resistant ego-aspect and engage your mind and spirit instead so that you have presence of mind as needed.

What prompted me to perceive a difference between go with the flow and get into the flow was when I heard or read (I don’t recall how or who) “It’s not about what you can get from the flow, but that you get into the flow.” Often, we think of go with the flow as a way to get what we need or desire from the flow—the Universal Energy-Matching Marketplace—whether that’s a feeling or something tangible. But that has a certain passive energy to it. Get into the flow, for me, has a feeling of serene inner action that’s highly attractive to the Good that Source wants me to enjoy and benefit from. It says to me that I’m not just going along, but am engaged with aligning my energy with the flow, order, and creative consciousness of Source. It says I’m in partnership with Source. Maybe that’s just me, but I feel a true difference between the two statements. It’s the difference between having access to one or a few items you need or desire and having unlimited access to what you need or desire.

Ever have one of those moments, events, or days when it appears that if something can go wrong, it seems to? That’s a time when both go with the flow and get into the flow can make a difference, and for me, they happen in that order, if I wasn’t in the flow to start with—which happens. While living in New York City, I was to set up a booth at an event. The event was one I not only looked forward to but carefully planned for. My handouts, business cards, and artificial bonsai tree were packed and ready to go in my wheeled suitcase the day before the event. It was scheduled to start at noon and last until two o'clock; which meant I needed to be at the site for 11:30 so I could set up my table. I was ready!

The morning of the event, I went through my usual meditative routine, and included my mantra, used especially when I have to commute or travel: I'm always in the right place at the right time with the right action and the right people. Using the subway on a Saturday means you have to allow extra time for a slower commute; for me, about an 80-minute ride to my destination. If I left by 10 a.m., I'd have enough time for the ride and to walk to the site. I didn't leave my apartment until almost 10:15. Pulling my weighted suitcase on the bumpy sidewalk, I made it to the subway station, a 15-minute walk without a suitcase. The entrance was roped off because the interior was being painted. I'm always in the right place . . .

I repeated my mantra as I quickly pulled my suitcase the eight blocks north to the next subway stop, also roped off. My brain went into gear: There wasn't enough time for me to keep walking north until I found an open station. I didn't have enough cash on me to take car service as far as the site, nor did I want to pay around $70 for a ride that cost $2.50 on the subway. And, that was just one way.

A note on a post caught my attention: It advised subway riders to use one of the shuttle buses they provided because of this (I hadn’t seen that sign at my original subway entrance). I crossed the street to where others stood at a regular bus stop. A woman explained what I had to do. I checked my watch; it was 10:40. The bus pulled up, I got on, and asked the driver if he was taking us to the next transfer station where I could catch the train. "It's not running there,” he told me. “You have to go to the transfer station after that one." Only 18 blocks, but to my now-getting-a-little-concerned ego-aspect, it seemed like 18 miles. I'm always in the right place . . .

I hurried down the steps to the subway platform. An express train was there and I flew through its doors and got a seat. At the main transfer station, I changed to the express train that would take me to my stop on Manhattan's Upper West Side. It was 11:20 and I was at a station in Lower Manhattan when I realized there was no express service in the city on Saturday; we'd make every local stop.

Understand, I wasn't upset or losing it, though I was bemused; then I was amused as I realized this was an opportunity to really practice what I preach. There was no way I could arrive frazzled and tout coaching to get peaceful, poised, on purpose, and empowered. I laughed to myself and believed it would all be fine. I chose to have an inner and outer experience that I'm always in the right place . . . What was happening at the inner level up to this point was I was going with the flow—until I had this realization on the train. At that moment, I got into the flow.

Remarkably, I arrived at the site at 11:45, ready to get set up and meet and greet the people. The room wasn't ready, and everyone hosting a table stood around looking not too happy. We didn't get our room until 12:15. It took no time for me to set up, so I started helping everyone who said they needed extra hands. I was the only one there who seemed to be in a good mood; everyone else seemed or was stressed. I activated my clown chakra and got some of them to smile and several to laugh. I was not just going with the flow: I was in it, a part of it.

At first blush, it might have appeared that lots of things went wrong. However, every time something seemed to go awry, something terrific followed it, because of both going with and then being in the flow. I chose to be the experience I wished to have. It’s a good practice, one you’ll appreciate.          

         

Practice makes progress.

© Joyce L. Shafer

Why the Way You Experience Life Is What It Is

Why is it that your efforts don’t ever seem to pan out as you’d like? Why does the same type of stuff happen to you repeatedly? Why can’t you get unstuck?

Each of those three questions is an important one, but especially why you can’t seem to get unstuck. Anyone who feels stuck in a life they desire to be different and improved contends with the fact of life in this physical-reality experience that how we experience life is a match to or reflection of our inner identity. Let’s go ahead and admit it: this just doesn’t feel good to know or accept. It’s easier to blame someone or circumstances. But that doesn’t create desired shifts, nor will it ever.

One of the popular practices promoted is to shift your thoughts to better ones. That can certainly be helpful and certainly aims you in a better direction than negative thoughts about you or others or circumstances ever could—which they can’t. There are times when that kind of positive-thought shifting feels easier and at other times feels nearly impossible. And, why doesn’t this always work or last as expected or desired?

Shifting thoughts, or using affirmations or visualizations, happens at the conscious level of mind. That’s all well and good—UNLESS—at the subconscious mind level, your inner identity is in direct contrast with what you use your conscious mind to try to convince your ego aspect is otherwise. You’ve got programs running deep, like an underground river, which means that’s where you need to paddle your boat if you’re going to move forward and find your way into the air and light.

It seems logical to then look at beliefs. You’ve possibly done exercises where you look at the beliefs you grew up with and absorbed from others about money, education, success, self-worth, your lovability, and so forth, and then rewrote them as better, more supportive belief statements. That’s a good practice, too. But why doesn’t that practice stick as well as expected either, if it hasn’t? It’s because the original beliefs became what you practiced for a very long time—they influenced your inner identity, and the new belief statements became your new verbal practices, but they don’t address your inner identity—what you believe you know about you as fact and truth, which is where you operate from at all times. And this is why you can get stuck here in belief statements, as well.

Maybe you try to convince yourself to believe in you because you weren’t taught to do that or because your value and worth and lovability were diminished by someone you trusted. But that was their practice, not the truth of you or about you. If—and when—you can truly see yourself as an expression of the God-Mind, you will realize that any thought you have about yourself that isn’t in alignment with that Truth can only be an illusion you practice. What makes the illusion feel real is that your inner identity gets matched in the physical realm to and with people and experiences—like moths to a flame. This is why any true and positive change or shift matches your inner identity at all times.

Your inner identity goes much deeper than the conscious level. It goes into the heart of what you believe about you and even deeper into what you believe about Source, God, God-Mind, One Consciousness, Universe—call it what you will. You may have said to yourself that you are an expression of the God-Mind and have a connection with God-Mind, and meant it or meant to mean it, but do you believe it as your inner identity, to the point where you know without doubt that it’s your Truth? It’s one thing to say it and another to believe it, know it, and live from it. If you’ve believed negative things about yourself for a lifetime, stepping into this Truth may or may not be as quick and easy for you as you’d like. But it’s doable, and it’s worth it so that you live and experience the true dignity of your existence.

If you can truly see and allow that you are an expression of the God-Mind, you will realize that absolutely nothing and no one is the source of your abundance, prosperity, well-being, worth, deservedness, lovability, and so on—no matter appearances—other than God-Mind, which is the only source, and your only Source, of everything. When you can begin to align with that as a fact of YOU and everything and everyone in creation, your inner identify can begin to realign with that Truth instead of the illusions you’ve believed. How you choose to feel about your experiences will shift. You will see your outer experiences begin to match or reflect your inner identity in ways that seem magical because of how fluid and natural they become. It’s possible that you’ve had moments where this was your experience. These were times when you connected with this Truth and experienced that connection as a feeling, a knowing. It’s a feeling like no other.

When your inner identity is aligned with this Truth, or as it begins to align with it, circumstances will become signposts that direct you onto a better path for you, rather than be viewed by your ego aspect as obstacles to beat your head against or be defeated by. And, you will no longer be able to tolerate some of the nonsense you currently tolerate from others or from yourself. I recently saw a quote that’s supposed to be Polish in its origins and is used when others want to pull you into their nonsense: “Not my circus. Not my monkeys.” You’ll also become aware that people who bring nonsense into your life, even serious types of nonsense, are letting you look into a necessary mirror to show you where and what your inner identity is reflecting outwardly and where and how it needs adjustment and realignment to the Truth of your divine nature.

You know your inner identity needs your attention when:

• You are present physically but are mentally focused on or in someone else’s business and life more than in or on your own. That’s a clear signal that you’re engaging victim mentality or are avoiding your own life and what may be needed to strengthen your inner identity, or that you’re doing both.
• Your sense of self and self-worth is diminished or lacking.
• Your energy for your life is lacking.
• You rely on others instead of yourself to cause you to feel good about you or to feel lovable and valuable. No one but you can heal the inner wounds that have influenced your expression of your inner identity.
• Even if loved by someone and or others, you still feel undeserving. This taints the love you give and causes you to fear giving and receiving love, as well.
• You live from your ego rather than your authentic self.
• Even though good things happen to and for you, you still feel empty and or undeserving.
• Compliments or praise make you feel uncomfortable rather than appreciated.
• You’re in a non-reciprocated intimate relationship (or any non-reciprocated relationship). You allow and accept less than you deserve from any and maybe all relationships, personal and professional.
• You allow yourself to accept blame for how consistently unhappy or angry someone else is.
• You allow verbal or physical abuse or apathy from someone or anyone, especially repeatedly.
• Most of your time and energy is spent putting out “fires”—yours or someone else’s—instead of creating something new that you’re enthusiastic about or on being focused on moving forward in your life.
• You use alcohol or other chemicals to escape or cope (long-term and frequent use, as opposed to occasional use).
• You ignore the “red flags” when you meet someone new, whether personally or professionally, and allow yourself to get hurt—again.
• You keep attracting the same types of non-supportive or emotionally unavailable or abusive people, whether in your personal or professional life or both.
• You people-please in an effort to receive approval, acceptance, and proof you are lovable and worthy.
• A person whom you know you shouldn’t be in any kind of relationship with keeps hooking you back in, including with “Let’s stay friends.” You’re addicted to the person—or rather, addicted to the chemicals that flood your body from the stress you experience with them or when you think about them, and your cells keep asking for hits of that particular “drug.”
• You’re addicted to stress and drama, which causes self-sabotage.
• An extreme form of this is when you’d rather not live than make necessary changes, mostly because you don’t realize it’s the condition your inner identity is in that’s contributing to your experiences—and that it doesn’t have to be this way. It’s not your physical life you want over but the cause of what hurts you that you want stopped. It won’t be anyone or anything that shifts in order for this to happen: it will be your inner identity that shifts, and you’ll be amazed at how wonderful this feels, because it is ultimately the true you that you seek and desire to be and express.

There are two significant ways to restore, realign, and re-enliven your inner identity: 1) Get clear on and in your relationship to and with Source and 2) love and encourage yourself from genuine (not egotistical) love and appreciation of and for you. Both of these, working together, can bring healing to emotional wounds that caused your inner identity to suffer. No affirmation, visualization, or positive thought can restore self-love. In fact, as well-intentioned and temporarily beneficial as these can be, they tend to remind you of what you believe you lack. Only your true willingness to love and appreciate yourself and your connection to Source can accomplish this restoration and replenishment. As a dialogue line in one of the Chronicles of Narnia movies said: “I’ve spent too long wanting what was taken from me, instead of what was given.” You’ve forgotten what Source gave you as your birthright—your heritage, as well as your personal power and your divine attributes to use while you’re here. This statement, borrowed in part from the bible, may help: I can do all things through SOURCE, which strengthens, supports, and supplies me through its Infinite Love and Resources.

You also want to stop putting your attention on what happened or happens that calls your inner identity into question and focus instead on why your soul aspect was or is willing to allow such experiences to happen, which was or still is to inspire you to heal childhood wounds that cause you to have the types of experiences you have as an adult, and to take responsibility for knowing and defining your true inner identity rather than let anyone else define it. If your inner identity needs redefining, please understand that this is one of the best, most loving things you can do for you. Others will benefit, but this is for you. It may also require some time and definitely intention, dedication, and—I’ll repeat—time, intention, and dedication to you and your right to an amazing life experience, whether the experiences are amazing or how you experience them feels amazing to you. Your inner identity didn’t shift from a divine expression of God-Mind to you believing it was less than that overnight. So it won’t necessarily shift back overnight either. But, you can do it, step by step, day by day, moment by moment. It’s a good practice, one you’ll appreciate.     

           

Practice makes progress.

© Joyce Shafer

Are Your Thoughts About Others from the Ego or the Heart?

When we choose to remember past moments, sometimes it’s the ego and sometimes it’s the heart that speaks. Which one speaks most often for and through you?

I was thinking about someone who has a tendency, or I should say an addiction, to consistently repeat or tell about unpleasant moments as (usually) her only conversation topics: “I remember when (this awful thing happened to me/this person did this awful thing to me)” or “Let me tell you about the latest unpleasant thing that happened (or what this person did/said to me).” This person has a steamer trunk filled with such topics, and more keep getting added in. I’m sure there are good memories in that trunk, but they don’t seem to rise to the surface as easily. In fact, it stopped her in her tracks one time when she was going through her list of unpleasant memories and I asked, “What is one of your favorite memories?” Once she was able to blink again, she said, “Why did you ask me that?” I told her I was just curious and would like to hear about one. It was the briefest she ever spoke about an experience; she did it in one brief sentence rather than her usual short or long story. This is an example of what happens to people when the ego, rather than the heart, is allowed to dominate, because the ego feeds on drama.

As I thought about this person’s tendency, I did what a lot of us do, which is I had an imaginary conversation with her where I suggested that what could be focused on was, “I remember when (this good thing happened, this person did this wonderful thing for me),” and so on, instead of the usual. And then I realized I was practicing exactly what the person practices. What an eye-opening reminder for me—yet again (sigh). It’s so easy to see what others do and miss the fact that we might do or are doing the very same thing, even if our version or justification for doing so appears to be different, at least, to us.

Following “I remember when” with good, touching, or funny stories shouldn’t be reserved for funerals. Stories told at funerals often recall acts of kindness or generosity the person did for them and or for others, funny moments shared with the person, the person’s best traits. And this happens despite anything else that occurred while the person was alive. I’m not saying this is always the case, but it does happen more often than not, or has in my experience. And if prior disputes or conflicts are mentioned, the tone of voice is usually softer; it and the words chosen wear the hue of compassion rather than animosity, or at least are spoken with the awareness that speaking ill of the deceased is frowned upon at such a time. Perhaps certain moments that originally irritated or angered the teller with the departed are now told with a tinge of humor. It’s amazing how many negative feelings carried for years about a person can be released or are when the person passes on. Maybe this is because the heart finally tells the ego to be quiet for a change, and forgiveness is allowed to release both individuals at that time, too late in some ways, but allowed.

In Doreen Virtue’s book, Assertiveness for Earth Angels, she has an interesting chapter called “Toxic Relationships: How to Recognize and Handle Them.” The toxic relationship types include Interrupting, Correcting, One-upmanship, Clingy Neediness, Stalking, Guilt-Tripping, Angerholism, Unreliability, Nosiness, Grumpiness, Accusatory Tendencies, Victimhood/Martyrdom, Controlling Behavior, Perpetual Clowning, Loudness, Substance Abuse, Lack of Boundaries, Name-Calling, Rudeness, Betrayal, Gossiping, One-sidedness, Drama Queen or King, Taking Advantage, Barbed Tongue, and Nonstop Talking. Phew! Look at those listings! I’ll bet that you, just as I, could readily assign those types to people you engage in relationships with or did. Would we also be as quick to list our name beside one or more of them, as behaviors we practice ourselves at times or more often?

One thing I know, based on experience—and it is all too easy to forget when we’re frustrated—is that practicing negative or judgmental thoughts about others, including when you’re not in their company, creates more of the same and serves to aggravate you even more. It stagnates or depletes your inner and physical energy, as well. It may satisfy the ego (temporarily) to engage thoughts and words in this way, but deep down, it doesn’t make us feel good at all. Not really. It also means that while we point one finger at another, three fingers point back at us.

It points out the fact that we have not addressed whatever issue we have with the person in a constructive and productive and peaceful way, if that’s possible—sometimes, it flat-out isn’t. Sometimes, you have to end a relationship with a person who practices one or more of those behavior types Doreen listed. Sometimes, it isn’t possible or realistic to end the relationship and keep your spiritual integrity intact at the same time, which means there’s an opportunity to learn about yourself and your potential for personal and spiritual growth that’s trying to step out of the shadows into the light.

The thing is that we tend to put our focus on others. What others do is what they do; it may be how they are, until they decide to change, if that ever happens. And they, as we, are here to learn their own lessons in their own way and in their own timing. When we observe or experience another’s behavior, it’s also an opportunity to look at ourselves. How do we feel about their behaviors and why do we feel that way? How do we feel about ourselves, and why? How do we respond or react? Is it with aggression, passivity, passive-aggression, people-pleasing, or assertiveness?

Assertiveness means we speak our truth and do so without getting snarky or outright mean or demeaning (or people-pleasing). Just as you don’t fight fire with fire (so to speak, since wildfires are sometimes fought with fire to contain them), ideally, you don’t address unpleasant behavior with more unpleasant behavior, as tempting to the ego as that might be. And if your truth is met with hostility, you can walk away (not stomp away), whether that’s until a better time to talk once both sides have calmed down enough so you can attempt better communication, or forever.

The rest of the time, check your thoughts and see how they’re running in your mind. It’s understandable, being the humans with egos that we are, that we’ll have thoughts come up about others or matters that irk us (trying to eliminate such thoughts completely is nearly impossible and may lead to self-judgment; choosing to shift into better thoughts is doable and a worthy practice). Sometimes those negative or judgmental thoughts are needed as part of the process used to gain greater understanding of or clarity about the dynamics involved and to figure out what we need to do or say. And sometimes we do need to talk to another about this so we (perhaps, finally) feel heard.

But we will benefit if we also look at ourselves in this process. Are we taking care of ourselves, and doing so with integrity? Are we communicating with integrity? What do we demonstrate or teach others by our own examples? How can we re-program ourselves to be better and healthier at the inner level if we practice old programs of complaining and blaming, and any of the behaviors listed, other than assertiveness, which is the only way to be authentic?

Deborah Tannen said, "Each person's life is lived as a series of conversations." We can begin to pay attention when we speak, as to whether our words come from the ego or from the heart. We can choose which one of those two we wish to give the greater voice to in our inner and outer experiences. We can think and share better thoughts about others while they’re still alive, or at least send them a silent blessing to find peace and joy within themselves, rather than entertain and feed the ego with negative thoughts about them. It’s a good practice, one you’ll appreciate.    

          

Practice makes progress.

© Joyce Shafer

Are You Too Busy to Be Happy?

We tend to believe if we’re busy enough, feeling happy or significant will be the result; but this all depends on us, as individuals, doesn’t it? So, we need to figure this out for ourselves.

An image was posted on a social site that said: Stop the glorification of busy. This reminds me of how much emphasis we put on what people do versus who they are, and how happy they are. There’s a theme running through our psyches that says we have to be and or stay busy or we’re not living up to our full potential. Underneath that is the other theme: concern about what others will think and say about us. Society-at-large claims to admire people who are on the go all the time, who live in the fast lane, who “live large.” The implication is that if you don’t fit into that mold, you aren’t someone special; your value or worth is less, according to those parameters.

I saw someone I hadn’t seen in years, which meant we had catching-up to do, so I asked about her children. Her conversation went something like this (all identifying information has been changed): “Mark is working for Acme Insurance. He’s a department manager. His wife, Anna, works at Booker Bank. She’s the loan manager. Their older son, Steve, is the floor manager at Estates Antiques. Their younger son, George, is the top salesman at Luxury Cars. Their daughter, Angie—” well, you get the picture. As the time passed, I asked more specific questions, but one thing stuck in my mind: how happy someone is, is rarely the first thing someone says about another.

We put so much emphasis on what people do when we could put it on who they are and how happy they are. How much admiration do we have or value do we place on someone who is genuinely kind, caring, and happy, and has a job, say, as a personal assistant, a cook, or a housekeeper? Or, we might comment, when asked how a mutual friend is doing after a move to a new town, that the move was a bold one; that we believe in our friend’s abilities; that we know there will be adjustment time involved, but that our friend possesses what she or he needs at the inner and outer levels to make life a good experience in the new place, rather than what work our friend is doing. 

There’s a story you may be familiar with about a business executive who visited a coastal village. He had a conversation with a local man and learned the local man got up in the morning when he wanted to, took his small boat out for an hour or two and caught enough fish to sell for money his family used, then spent the rest of the day and evening with his family and friends, where they all enjoyed each other’s companionship. It was a simple, easy, joyful life the local man described.

The executive launched into a discussion about how the man could get more boats over time and create a huge, profitable business. The executive was in his element during this conversation: Building businesses from scratch and growing them was his expertise and passion. The local man listened carefully then asked why he should do that. The executive explained that with proper management, the man could sell the company and retire in twenty years with enough money that would allow him to get up in the morning when he wanted to, fish when he wanted to, and spend as much time with his family and friends as he wanted to. The local man replied, “I do that now.”

Someone posed an excellent question about this story: Which man was happy? What’s your answer to that question? The question-poser’s answer was an intriguing one: Both of them. What made each man happy was different. One man liked to stay busy in a particular way to feel fulfilled; the other liked to stay just busy enough to feel fulfilled. Each man had certain responsibilities they had to attend to, which they did, and you can bet that each man had challenges they had to meet in life, but they knew what made them happy and lived it.

We put so much emphasis on what we and others do and so little on what makes us genuinely happy. We keep ourselves busy, either with genuine responsibilities, some of which we probably could delegate, or with busywork, so we can appear productive to ourselves and others. Never confuse activity with productivity. We trap ourselves in that vortex far too often and too easily, either with physical activity or mental activity.

One friend of mine had the thought instilled in her that if she took the time to read a book for her own purpose or pleasure she was guilty of the sin of laziness (I just heard the collective gasp of avid readers). So she worked and worked and did and did, all the time. She and I had many conversations about this, until she was finally able to find the courage to read a book. She was in her 40s before this happened, and she did so under the disapproving gaze of the person most adamant about it being a lazy person’s thing to do, as she took her turn to sit with him in his hospital room.

My father was a workaholic. My mother was always doing something. Neither ever sat and watched TV without doing some other task at the same time. It’s no surprise I too became a workaholic, until a health matter put an end to that. It took me several years to move past denial of this, as well as continuing to push myself to the borderline critical stage, before I really got the message. Then it took another year or two to figure out how to live and function in a new way, and to see the gifts that came with this, such as a different level of creativity, because I could no longer afford to be active without being productive. It was especially challenging to deal with others who couldn’t comprehend or adapt to this new “reality” for me. Comments were often harsh. Eventually, I had to not care what others thought. It shouldn’t take a health matter for us to not care what others think or to choose balance for ourselves and our lives.

We have been programmed to believe if we are busy enough, it will lead to happiness. Why? Because if you’re busy, you must be being compensated, right? And if you’re compensated, you must be able to afford stuff, and stuff makes us happy, right? Yet, some of the busiest people are the most under-compensated and some of the best-compensated people are some of the unhappiest.

There’s also the aspect of strengthening our spiritual side to consider. How can we do this if we never sit still long enough to hear the deeper messages or to balance and recharge our energy, or to nurture our connection with the One Consciousness? We also need to consider the mental, emotional, and physical drain on us that can happen when we don’t have that balance in our lives.

Do you identify with who you really are, or with what you do and are experiencing? Do you project this onto others, as well? Maybe a good question is: How happy am I in general? Do I make time to not be busy so that the other parts of my life are fulfilling and joyful? It’s time to stop the glorification of busy for ourselves and others and embrace life and its many facets, and determine for ourselves what makes life a happy experience for us. It’s a good practice, one you’ll appreciate.   

          

Practice makes progress.

© Joyce Shafer

Are We Becoming Spiritual Orphans?

The current movement to awaken or enhance spiritual consciousness has been ongoing for decades. Are we doing as well as we might with this, or could we do much better?

I saw the opening text scrolled on the screen for the movie “Anthony Adverse” (which I chose not to watch) that ended with the sentence, “They were spiritual orphans.” Spiritual orphans—what a term; it intrigued me. My dictionary includes the definition of orphan that you might expect, of a child whose parents have died. There was another definition there, as well: “a product that is medically valuable but is not produced because it lacks a profitable market.” And there was the verb form: “to cause to become an orphan [orphaned by the war].”

Using the standard definition, I’d say a spiritual orphan is a person whose feeling, intuitive Heart guidance has been disconnected or diminished, or its existence has never been realized or developed: it isn’t working right, for whatever reason, so the innate guidance isn’t fulfilling its function. As for the second definition, you could say the lack of a profitable market (public recognition and receptivity) holding the product that has value (the full expression of spirituality) back from or for widespread use is the ridicule or dismissal true spirituality receives from mainstream and experts.  

Looking at marketability a different way, no one would argue the fact that books and other items focused on spirituality have been produced and are still a profitable market, but the items themselves are not spirituality, and using the items does not guarantee spirituality as the result. How do you obtain spirituality, or find it to obtain it? Here’s a quote by Rumi that answers this question simply and well, though I make a specific statement about this later on: “I looked in temples, churches and mosques. But I found the Divine in my heart.” You could say, “I looked in books, listened to tapes, and attended seminars. But I found my spirituality in my feeling, intuitive Heart.”

If you ever feel like a spiritual orphan, you might consider whether you approach spirituality solely or predominantly through your left-brain (logic, analysis, seeing just the “dots”). If so, this is a big part of the disconnection or lack of connection you experience. You can’t get to spirituality through the left-brain. You have to use both the right- and left-brain in combination with the feeling, intuitive Heart.

Every bit of information—conscious or subconscious—that you receive becomes a code that your brain, your biological computer, decodes and acts on or stores for reference. This includes information you don’t necessarily recognize as such, which includes commercials, ads, movies, billboards, symbols and logos, video games, and so on: everything you take in through your five senses is code that your brain processes, including subliminally, and possibly believes without question. Just as you are what you eat, you become, in some way, the information you ingest, deliberately or not, as well.

Think of it like this: each side (and part) of your brain has its own software, so to speak. The right side is coded for feelings (love, compassion, and empathy), intuition (expanded awareness), no time-no space awareness (you’re in the Now rather than the past or future), and realizing the bigger picture (holistic viewpoint, connecting the “dots”). But too much right-sidedness doesn’t allow you to put what you receive then decode into order or practical application (you feel unfocused, you drift along), which is where the left side comes in; but it’s meant to be a servant to the right side, not the dictator or ridiculer it can become.

If you process solely or predominantly through the left-brain, you might believe anything or might discount what you ought to believe, even if it defies what you’ve been told (e.g., Intuition is real, valuable, and felt vs. intuition doesn’t exist, or is nothing more than an advanced form of logic). If you decode information received solely or predominantly through the right-brain, you might interpret information according to what it is you prefer to believe about it, even if it defies or ignores reality (self-protective denial), or not be able to figure out what to do with the information (inertia based on confusion that results from conflicting beliefs or resistance, perhaps).

Even if you manage to use whole-brain thinking (or don’t), you still need to include the emotional, intuitive Heart, which reveals a Divine Trinity we humans are capable of but seldom use, mostly because it isn’t taught and we aren’t taught that it is who we inherently are. We look for spirituality; but where do we usually go to look at and decide on what the Truth of spirituality is? The left-brain. Jonathon Miller-Weisberger said, “It is necessary to perceive truth with the heart, not just the mind.” It’s the same for our spirituality.

Using intuition (expanded awareness) as our example, the fact that it is real is in direct contrast with what the left-brain is programmed and conditioned to believe (or is believed evil by some), so intuition is difficult for the left-brain to accept, much less use (a real contrast is that intuition is dismissed by the establishment but used by governments). Depending on your conditioning, you might believe everything you’re told by the “experts,” without question; and if the experts’ “facts” change after several years (or months), you’ll believe those as well, without question.

Your feeling, intuitive Heart is where Truth resides. The ancients who understood this maintained that our innate, true intelligence was found in the Heart, not in the brain/mind. The Heart filters out programming and tells you what you really feel, as well as what is going on energy-wise—even ahead of you seeing evidence, as opposed to the left-brain telling you what ought to think or decide the Truth is, based on your programming.

While living in New York City, someone asked me to take a road-trip to Louisiana. I went back and forth with logic about this (I did want to go, but not with that person) until I finally decided to leave all thought out of it and ask my Heart what it had to say. I got a resounding yes. I e-mailed the person and never heard back. Two days later, someone else contacted me and said he’d pay me a nice sum and all expenses to ride with his girlfriend, who was driving to Louisiana for an extended stay, and would arrange and pay for my flight back. Of course I said yes. My intuitive Heart knew I was to take the trip and that there was a better deal that would be offered. My Heart’s yes was not about the first offer, as my left-brain believed when I got the answer, but the offer I didn’t know about yet.

But we seem to continue to move further and further from listening to and operating from our Heart. The further away we move from our feeling, intuitive Heart, the further we are from being connected to the spirituality that is inherent in us and that we so deeply desire—and need. But here’s what we must Know: spirituality is not something we obtain; it’s something we already are. But we forget or never learned this, or it’s blocked behind so much that we have been taught and told. This is why listening to our Heart is not necessarily easily done: because so many others have forgotten this or have in some way been disconnected from this Truth, and they have been or are our experts, teachers, and examples.

This leads me to the verb form of orphan: to cause to become an orphan. When you see some of the stories about what’s going on in the world, do you consider them with your left-brain or right-brain only, or also with your Heart, which tells you “This isn’t right”? I saw an image that has stuck with me, of a very young black child curled into the fetal position on the dirt, belly swollen from starvation, still alive but barely. Two yards behind the child was a vulture, waiting. That was the moment when I grasped that we can look for our spirituality as far and wide as we wish, alter our appearance to look the part (as though true spirituality has a look), or do all manner of methods or practices, and still miss the fact of it as our true nature and our responsibility, because of where else we’re looking—or not looking. In this way, we all risk becoming spiritual orphans in some measure.

Perhaps the inundation of all that’s going on in the local and global communities, most of which makes no rational sense and demonstrates lack of Heart and spirituality, is contributing to making spiritual orphans of us all in some way, bit by bit, drip by drip. The more this inundation continues the more we move away from appropriate response and into overburdened senses; and our feeling, intuitive Heart becomes dulled as a self-protection mechanism. The more we move into this dulled way of being, the further away we move from not just the Truth of our spirituality but also from being and living as who we really are.

We are points of Divine Consciousness dreaming a physical experience. This statement is not airy-fairy; it’s a quantum physics fact that no one in-the-know argues with or can (any longer), but is still not being incorporated into our collective dialogues to expand our understanding of the true nature of reality and ourselves: there is only the Spiritual that exists; physical and spiritual are not separate, they are one and they are Spiritual. The way back to the Truth of who we are, to our spiritual nature, is through the feeling, intuitive Heart.

On YouTube is a 9-minute video of Erica Goldson’s 2010 high school valedictory speech. It is worth watching to hear how she explains what education is and does today, how it robs the upcoming generation of what’s needed to make a difference and to have a fulfilling life. It’s an articulate, well thought out speech from one individual who saw what-is, who proclaimed the Emperor has no clothes on, and pointed out that there are many who either see only what they’re told to see or ignore the fact of what they see. It’s brilliant, and I hope you watch it, because what she says about how students are being trained to be workers to fit employer needs rather than critical thinkers and creators, ties in with how we are being numbed to seeing, listening, and feeling with our Hearts. Look at what’s going on in schools today. Are we teaching upcoming generations that they are intelligent, creative, conscious, spiritual beings or are we teaching them to be spiritual orphans? However, it isn’t just the system. What do our own examples show them?

We might start to connect some dots using our whole brain and Heart. For example, you might read this article online: “Harvard Study: Fluoride Lowers Children’s Intelligence By Seven IQ Points,” which discusses the proven, stunning negative impacts on the brain and body in all age groups. The idea that toxins are used in this way (and in far too many other ways), despite controversy since it started, impacts us on the feeling, intuitive level, which is another form of spiritual orphaning: our left-brain argues that no one would do this knowingly (but it’s done); our right-brain doesn’t want to believe it is happening (but it is); our feeling, intuitive Heart knows it for what it is. But will we listen? 

The movement to awaken spiritual consciousness is ongoing, but is it or will it happen fast enough? It’s up to us, isn’t it? We can improve and expand our consciousness and spirituality by simply ceasing to do whatever is opposite of that, but we have to know what that is. Our feeling, intuitive Hearts can tell us, if we’ll listen and if we’ll act. Then we can be examples for others and the next generation and the next. It’s a good practice, one you’ll appreciate. 

          

Practice makes progress.

© Joyce Shafer

Natural Chaos Should Not Be Feared but Embraced

We rely on rules to prevent chaos, but do rules ever get in the way of what’s natural? Is chaos ever a good thing?

We resist and or fear both unnatural chaos (for good reason) and natural chaos (because we’ve been conditioned to), so we rely on policies and rules to ease individual and collective fears and, we usually hope, to smooth life’s path. How’s that really working so far? Can we go too far with this? Can chaos ever be a good thing? What if natural chaos actually contributes to desired improvement? Let’s see.

I read an article posted on a social site: “School ditches rules and loses bullies.” It was a fascinating and revealing account of an Auckland, New Zealand, school that, as part of a university experiment, got rid of the playground rulebook (and all rules, which was beyond what the experiment required) that had been created to do what you might expect such rules to do: protect children and property, and maintain order. The astonishing results of the no-rules experiment were there were fewer injuries, less vandalism, and a significant drop in bullying. Also, concentration levels in the classroom increased. Could this remarkable result also apply outside that school’s environment, for all of us?

Principal Bruce McLachlan said, "We want kids to be safe and to look after them, but we end up wrapping them in cotton wool when in fact they should be able to fall over." This return to what it was like before health and safety policies began to rule at the school led to the re-realization that the activities and fun children create when allowed to, without numerous restrictions, kept them so occupied and creative that the time-out area was no longer needed, nor were as many teachers required to keep watch. "The kids were motivated, busy and engaged. In my experience, the time children get into trouble is when they are not busy, motivated and engaged. It's during that time they bully other kids, graffiti or wreck things around the school." The children were happy, and parents were happy because their children were happy.

The article went on to comment that a certain amount of risk-taking develops parts of the brain and develops the ability to work out consequences of actions. "You can't teach them that. They have to learn risk on their own terms. It doesn't develop by watching TV; they have to get out there."

Interestingly, the comments that resulted on the social site posting were equally revealing. One person was insistent (despite the proven results) that without rules, bullying would increase. The poster (both a mother and in the educational field) replied that children would learn consequences of actions and to defend themselves; and that in adulthood there is no teacher to run to. A replier to the poster’s comment stated that because he’d always had an adult to take care of everything for him when he was growing up, as an adult he doesn’t know what to do in certain circumstances. Another replier feared that children would be punished for standing up for or defending themselves, as had been her experience (which mimics what does happen in society at large: for example, a resident can be sued by a thief injured while breaking into the resident’s house).

The replier concerned about a potential (or, in his opinion, inevitable) increase in bullying wrote: “I get all that, but I think that no matter what, there would still be bullies. I know I, for one, would see this as an opportunity to be an even bigger bully. No rules? Then there would be more punishment for disobeying me. I’m not trying to say it’s a good thing, but I think it could lead to some not-so-good things.” The poster replied, “That’s the society we’ve become. You’re right. It’s kind of scary, not to mention that kids allowed to explore and make their own mistakes are often the ones that are inventors and the great thinkers. It would be a different world if we were allowed to just experience life, rather than just doing what we’re told.”

At this point, I added my two-cents-worth: Bullies happen—in the schoolyard and in the bigger world. They can legislate behavior all they want in both venues, but there will always be those with either the primary psychosis (from birth) or secondary psychosis (from conditioning), who act out as bullies. The only thing legislating behavior does is oppress those who don’t need the rules in the first place, those who know how to behave or who figure it out as they go—who figure out that they have a choice: find a way to co-exist as peacefully as possible or get into trouble. They can legislate behavior out the yin-yang, and it’ll still be the bullies who come out to “play” while all the others are following the rules—the unnecessary rules. It’s a matter of how much freedom will we give up because there are bullies in the schoolyard (or the global environment) who don’t play by anyone’s rules.

Natural chaos and unnatural chaos spawn different experiences and outcomes because of the energy and motivation inherent in each. In the matter of Prohibition, a law put into effect in the U.S. in the 1920s and pushed for by those who wanted to control others’ personal choices, specifically alcohol consumption, the unnatural chaos created by the imposed rule resulted in an escalation in organized crime and other crime, violence, and imprisonment. In the matter of the school and playground experiment, the natural chaos created by removing the rules so children worked things out for themselves (within reason, as they were children) resulted in enhanced self-learning, self-modifying, creativity, harmony, productivity, conflict resolution, self-governing behavior, and focus and attention. Although the article didn’t mention this, it’s difficult to imagine that a boost in self-confidence and self-reliance was not also a result.

How much of the chaos happening in the world now is actually caused by more or certain rules or policies being added or remaining rather than going to the true root of the matter and addressing the individuals causing the real problems? It’s become the “norm” in society to treat symptoms rather than target the true cause, be it alcoholism or health or whatever. It’s also become the “norm” to make rules everyone must follow, not just those who actually need proper and effective attention. It’s like what sometimes happened when I was in school: one student misbehaved and the entire class was punished.

We’re in a society that rewards people who follow the rules, even the nonsensical or infringing ones. The “rewards” are that they don’t get penalized; they get proverbial pats on the head; they get to feel superior to rule-breakers (or be envious, depending on the rules not followed). We have a profusion and confusion of rules, and the letter of the law tends to be followed rather than the spirit of the law. At a lower point on the gradient, specific utensils are to be arranged in a particular order and used as appropriate when you dine or you’re thought to be unsophisticated, low, less. At a middle point, stop signs at intersections are to encourage safety and avoid confusion; but if it’s three in the morning, no traffic anywhere, with clear visibility in all directions, and you slow or pause rather than stop, you could get a ticket because you broke a rule. At a more extreme point, something is legal in one county or state, but illegal in another; legal in one country, but illegal in another; immoral for individuals, but moral (or deemed acceptable) for those in positions of power. There are personal-choice decisions made for us that we should be responsible to make on our own.

If everyone everywhere learned and followed the moral compass to never steal or violate in any way the life, property, and security of anyone, and taught this to their children, what need of rules would there be? Who would need to create rules, and for what reason? The replier to the post about bullying believes the world would be an even more unsafe place without lots of rules and perhaps even more of them, then went on to explain why: because without them, he would be abusive or more abusive. During the experiment, I venture to say that any bullies who did attempt their behaviors with the children in the schoolyard were dealt with by the children.

For those who ignore moral right anyway, there is usually only one way to deal with or stop them: deterrents regarding their own well-being, to give them pause before they choose to exhibit such behaviors or to help them correct behaviors. This may sound harsh to some, but it’s akin to preventive healthcare. In the school experiment, it’s possible that several children stood together to oppose a bully who then backed down, or perhaps they refused to include any bully in activities and play, until the bully chose to behave better and did, and perhaps demonstrated a sincere desire to contribute in a productive way.

If some people never broke or ignored certain and, particularly, unnecessary rules, including academic; never thought outside of the creativity box; or colored outside the lines, we’d have a poverty of inventions, innovations, improvements, and cultural arts. We could, indeed, become better problem solvers than we currently are, individually and collectively. Natural chaos brings our attention to where problems or issues exist so we can resolve them in a beneficial way—or is supposed to. But so many, as with the replier, hold the belief that mankind in general, as individuals and as a collective, are incapable of controlling their behaviors and actions or of truly knowing and honoring the difference between moral right and wrong, so must have rules imposed on them/us. All we have to do is look around and realize this is not wholly true or accurate. Yes, there are those who seem not to possess a moral compass or would act against their moral compass, but they could be addressed individually, as needed. Their unnatural chaos tendencies could be managed. And if you think about it, those who do not follow a moral compass are outnumbered by those who do.

Natural chaos causes inventions and innovations to flourish, as has happened throughout history: We have no cause to fear it, but every reason to embrace it. As Plato said, “Necessity … the mother of invention.” Chaos is a teacher, including teaching us what not to do. Fear of chaos can lead to the death of imagination, and to the end of freedom, on a school playground or in daily life. Ben Franklin said, “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither, and will lose both.”

The school experiment demonstrated the positive results of natural chaos and the freedom to address it that leads to better self-governing, personal responsibility, and improved creativity, productivity, and cooperation required for quality problem solving and as-peaceful-as-possible co-existence. The rules had, previously, created something of a mental, imaginational, and socially restrictive enclosure for the children. The absence of the rules opened “doors and windows and skylights” to let freshness into their minds. It opened a beneficial level of freedom for the students, teachers, and, yes, even most of the bullies.

Imagination and freedom of thought, word, and action—guided by moral right and Natural Laws of the One Creator and a mutual understanding and agreement about these—are needed to create, including to create a better state of existence if the one experienced isn’t working as well as it could. We, as individuals and a collective, have an obligation to ourselves and others to work on and increase our consciousness and awareness so that rules are not required for peaceful co-existence and quality of life. The school children in the experiment proved—or rather, reminded us—that this is possible. It’s a good practice, one you’ll appreciate.           

Practice makes progress.

© Joyce Shafer

Choices and False Choices

How many of our choices are actually false choices? What does this even mean? It means sometimes we are given or experience the illusion of choice, and may not realize this.

The simplest way to demonstrate this is with a question a parent, who wants vegetables eaten, might ask a reluctant child: Do you want broccoli or carrots? It seems a clever way to get a goal accomplished, when dealing with a child, that is. Sometimes a false choice is so subtle you don’t see it for what it is.

A man and woman were guest experts on a news program, to discuss a finding that claimed the happiest wives, based on a study, were ones whose husbands stayed at work longer. That the ideal number of hours a husband should be at work each week is 56. The man said that after people are married a number of years, they don’t want to be around each other as much as they once did. The woman said one reason this office time for husbands makes wives happy is there is more money available for the wives to take care of themselves with and for them to have lunch with their girlfriends; that these husbands working 56 or more hours a week are supposed to come home after their day on the job and make their wives feel special and cared for. She then mentioned that women who work outside the home always have two jobs: the office and the home and children, which is why husbands should help at home. The man countered that he realized men are now expected to help with housework, but that wives complain that they washed a dish with cold water rather than hot.

I don’t think I blinked the entire brief time they spoke, and I’m pretty sure my jaw dropped. Was it a real study or a quick survey, and what questions were asked? How accurate are we to believe the results are? One guest added quickly, as an afterthought at the end, that the participants were middle-age. How effective and representative is it to test only one age group and only one gender?

What’s sad, I think, is how many people may have watched that segment in part or in its entirety and then believed the finding is a truth that should be adhered to—because the guest experts said so—or rather, because they said the wives involved said so, which they then shared as gospel, and the rest of us are supposed to accept as fact. We are to believe that any husband not doing this is now wrong. That a husband’s choice is to work 56 or more hours a week and have a happy wife or work fewer hours a week and have an unhappy one. What might some women and men (and children) who heard this think their choices are? What were your thoughts as you read this?

The two program guests were to be considered authority figures by viewers, but I saw them more as promoters, of what though, I’m still not sure. There are some who hear or read such information as the guests provided and believe it’s their only or best choice, made consciously or subconsciously. Any choice given that leads one or more sentient individuals into being controlled or manipulated, no matter the path or the provider, is a false choice, with only the provider’s agenda in mind. This is important because too often we miss or don’t recognize that believing in or dealing with false choices is not only about who offers the choices and what the choices are but also about us and our willingness or conditioned habit of going along with such controlling or manipulating methods. 

We have the ability and the Free Will Right to make discernments and judgments for ourselves. We are not supposed to believe everything we’re told, including by those we consider or are told are authority figures. We are meant to listen to or read information then assess and decide for ourselves, using rationale, reasoning, and, as appropriate, personal experience. We are to notice when a false choice is being offered to or pushed upon us. We are to use common sense and conscience to guide us about right and wrong.

Anytime we KNOW a particular choice is wrong for us or just plain wrong, yet choose it or agree to it or allow it anyway, we practice a form of schizophrenia (split-personality), and that can add up over a lifetime, with negative effects, especially about decision-making and what we believe we deserve. Have you ever felt that way when you weren’t on board or aligned with something but did it or agreed to it just the same? You’re uncomfortable—about the choice and about how you feel during and after what follows. Maybe you made the choice or chose to go along because you may have been afraid of some form of loss, criticism, reprimand, or penalty or punishment if you didn’t, whether imagined or real. That’s also a false choice experience, imposed by another and exercised by you. Head and heart alignment is imperative, to keep us in integrity.

There is a certain amount of going along that gets done in life because it is a rational choice made in order to avoid unnecessary conflict, especially violent, and to exist peacefully. But this isn’t to happen when our choices are clearly seen as false ones we truly don’t agree or align with based on what is morally appropriate and inappropriate or right and wrong. We have the responsibility to discern what is true and what is false, what is right and what is wrong; and not just according to our perceptions, which may be falsely indoctrinated ones, but by looking at what’s really there for us to see.

Perception serves us best when it aligns exactly or as closely as possible with Truth. In The Trivium, Sister Miriam Joseph stated, “Truth has an objective norm in the real.” Objective, not subjective. My dictionary defines the word perceive as “to take hold of, feel, comprehend through; to grasp mentally; take note of; observe; to become aware of through one of the senses, especially through sight—SYN. DISCERN.” Perception is meant to assist us with greater accuracy in our translation of information received and what we discern about it then do with it.

Perception often gets confused with attitude adjustment or alignment, the interpretation that results after we pass what we see or experience through personal mental-emotional filters. An example is the “glass half full, half empty” one. We can observe and then perceive the truth that the water is at the halfway mark. Being told we must choose whether the glass is half full or half empty is a false choice. Deciding subjectively whether it’s to be thought of or called half full or half empty by us is a personal choice, made for our own benefit or comfort, but the objective truth is the water is at the halfway mark.

Several decades back a diet book written by an expert became a mega-best-seller (I will not mention the name). The information in the book was assumed to help people lose extra weight and stay optimally fit for life. What actually happened was that after several years, the obesity rate in the U.S., as well as diabetes, escalated in a way never before seen. In fairness, the author did state who in particular was to follow the diet and who wasn’t, which was ignored. The fact is that each individual is responsible to learn what his or her body responds well to and poorly to. If a diet method says to ingest something your body doesn’t tolerate well, you have the free will choice to ingest or not whatever it is that creates the symptoms or reaction. And, using a product available to mask symptoms of your body’s reaction to something it doesn’t tolerate is a choice you can make, but based on a false choice. That’s allowing someone deemed as in authority to tell you it is okay to do what’s inappropriate or harmful for you rather than you being responsible and saying, “No, it isn’t. There has to be a better way, even if it means not doing it” or “I choose to do what I choose to do.”

False choices occur as often as they do because some people attempt to skew others’ perceptions of reality to their own, for their own purposes, or to the one they want to sell (Aspartame, once listed by the Pentagon as a biochemical agent for warfare, now renamed AminoSweet because it sounds “healthier,” for example). Please—read my articles if you choose, but question what I say as well; do your own research and exploration. We all need to be able to question what we see and hear in an intelligent manner and not believe everything we’re told. If the latter is what we practice more often, we’ll make choices that seem correct or appropriate but are anything but, for ourselves and for others. This is important not just for individuals to practice, but for the collective as well.

When what we’re told to believe contrasts with the reality we see and experience, what then? Do we trust the truth we observe or experience ourselves, or do we engage in a shared collective hallucination? What false choices do we present to ourselves, including behaviors? We also have to monitor ourselves for false perceptions, as well, self-induced or otherwise. Sounds tricky, doesn’t it? But, it’s a worthy practice we owe to ourselves to engage in. You can know the truth (water at halfway mark) and also choose how you wish to consider it (half full, half empty), if making that choice assists you in any way, but don’t then consider the truth as unimportant or subjective.

Know that when you recognize a false choice or an inaccuracy for what it is and perhaps choose not to go along, you may be criticized, ostracized or even penalized. I know how strong that sounds, but it’s not an unfamiliar experience for any of us, if we pause to think about it. When you are given the choice between two or more options you recognize as equally not good, be willing to recognize it for what it is: a false choice, not a real choice, because neither or none are what you would choose. What you do or choose from there serves you better if you follow your true moral compass, which isn’t always necessarily easy to do but can be done and is worth it. Keep your integrity intact through head and heart alignment. It’s a good practice, one you’ll appreciate.             

Practice makes progress.

© Joyce Shafer