RE: [ET2] Co-creation

> But suppose the stuff about Being and Oneness really IS
> TRUE......?
> So then the construct (normally code for "False") is
> actually about
> something True...?
>
> Suddenly our Construct and our Non-Construct are
> talking about the same
> thing, pulling in the same direction.
> No Resistance!!!!
>
> So I was thinking all this and then someone posted the
> Sacred Heart
> meditation bit that included:
>
> > you will then
> > joyfully lend your Self to the highest service of Humanity.
>
> The same idea again - The Self (the earthly,
> constructed, personality Self)
> can become co-creator with the higher, the truth etc.
>
> It all seems to fall so neatly into place that I then
> worry about the
> feeling of certainty and "doneness" that arises in me.
> ("As soon as you
> think you Know something is when you stop really Knowing")
>
> Anyone like to do me a favour and deconstruct my
> construct about this?....

LOL! Very nice thinking Mary and thank you for your great thoughts
on the topic.

Here's the deal.

So *I* set out to make my own map of the universe (because I'm so
pissed off with what's on the menue!)

And so I start going back and back and back, to the deepest
pre-suppositions of the various constructs (for that is all I can
know) and I pick up a basic thing which I find interesting and
which I challenge - and this is as follows:

There is NO religion that allows a human being to TAKE ALL THEIR
BITS to enlightenment.

Some make you leave your body, some your thoughts, most try and
make you give up your consciousness, ALL make you lose your
constructs (to replace with one of THEIR choosing which IMHO sucks
worse than the one you had when you started with!!!!) and very few
even acknowledge the energy body - and if they do, in a very
manipulative and non-nice fashion.

Now don't laugh but the truth is that I used to be a dog trainer
and my speciality was to take extremely damaged and unlikely
rescue dogs and get them and their "off the street" owners to a
better standard of competition work than the ones who "had it
all" - an experienced handler, a genetically suitable body, a
great upbringing and so forth.

And what I learned there most profoundly was is that if you GO
WITH WHAT THERE IS and make it your starting point, no questions
asked, no complaints given, and work with ALL OF IT, not trying to
get rid of any aspect or thing, then you make miracles happen.

Dog training is such a perfect metaphor for so many things - LOL.
But it is really true that I learned there full on, with every
form of evidence procedure you could ever want, that peoples
expectations of what dogs can do, and especially very damaged ones
(!!) is so way off the mark, it is astonishing.

So, move on time 20 years and now Silvia is working with the
underlying patterns of people instead.

And what we have is a very similar thing. Dogs and owners are
engaged in a war neither wants, simply because they don't
understand each other and have totally wrong expectations of one
another. You correct that and they start working together, and
BOOM! Magic.

I first applied this to conscious/unconscious communication as a
principle (that would be Project Sanctuary) and simply
pre-supposed that there is NO such thing as sabotage, that both
want and need certain things which, if each other agreed to give
them, it would clear the way for forward movement and a shift to a
totally different level of effectivity in the world for either one
AND for the joint effort, the team, they represent.

You get the construct and the true self to work together likewise
to a common goal, and hey presto, the same effect.

So the first thing in this type of work is to:

a) restore lines of communication;

and

b) allow each party to have their say and take them seriously.

I'm taking the *constructs* point of view very seriously indeed
and I do what I can to not ever make it feel useless, or stupid,
or bad etc.

Likewise, I'm taking the bodies point of view very seriously also
and of course, the thought-minds, the unconscious minds, whatever
these bits are - they all get to have a say in my model somewhere
along the line, and NO-ONE is dragged along kicking and screaming
but a way is found to get their active co-operation somehow.

That way is always simply and nothing more than to ...

FILL THEIR NEEDS.

That's the original Harmony programme and it is so deceptively
easy, yet so inordinately profound and wide reaching, it sometimes
scares me just how much there is to this.

So,and to come back to your original question/concern, of course
things become incredibly easy, start to feel inordinately good and
shift to a totally different level of organisation when we take
the construct along as well as everything else and GIVE IT THE
TIME TO ADJUST - but more than that, it can even HELP US OUT in
its own way, actively, not just by keeping quiet and dissolving
itself as soon as possible please!

That's a horrible thing to say to ANY entitity, any creature, any
part of us at all and rightfully, it is resisted!

And so, if there's a part of the construct that says, "This is
just too easy, too pat, know what I mean? I can't buy that!"

... what we do is to STOP and say,

"Ok, I hear you. I can understand why you would think that and
indeed, you might well be right - there may be many things we
haven't looked at properly yet, things we're not seeing right now,
challenges or problems that haven't arisen, there may be a problem
with our calculations or our model might be off.

"So, what exactly are you worried about? Which bits particularly?
Let's closely examine them because you might well have a point."

This is what I mean about "going slow" and "being thorough". There
are many parts in ME or in my construct which are worried like
yours that it can't be this simple.

Much worse though, have you any idea how difficult it is for ME as
a construct to hold this together and NOT question along the lines
of, "Who the HELL are YOU to be saying any of this??? To think you
know better than Richard Bandler??? You useless worm ..." - well
you know the kind of stuff!

These kind of construct-parts are softening up noticeably as I'm
taking my time to collect evidence, make techniques, run tests,
try things out on a variety of people, in a variety of
circumstances and I'm very happy that they are there and for now,
keeping me in careful check in all ways.

And, and this is ALWAYS the most fascinating part, the more I pay
attention and acknowledge the input rather than try to fight and
eradicate it, the less trouble they become; the more HELPFUL they
become, and the more respectful the tone of the internal dialogue
has become, even flipping into supportive suggestions now and then
instead of wild screaming to make me stop.

It stands to reason, doesn't it.

Which is why I've said repeatedly - let's take it easy. Pay
attention and observe. Try out things for yourself and in your own
time. Don't MAKE yourself do techniques if you don't want to. Look
for something that really attracts you and has the least
resistance to it.

Listen carefully to all of yourself, construct or not. Ok, so
constructs aren't real but boy,they are HARD and when you're in
them, stuff REALLY hurts, bad.

We don't like that, not a single bit of us, and we'll align to get
out of it and into better things, no matter how you want to phrase
it.

Each person has their own challenges, their own path, their very
unique way of doing this - and in their own time.

And ALL of us have still so much to learn, to understand, to
integrate and to unravel, and we will. It will be a lot easier
with a better attitude to *all* of our bits, whatever they may be,
and more internal co-operation, which includes free-flow of
information, power and resources around the system.

So yes, I think we can allow ourselves to be a bit excited here
and to go check stuff out, see how it stands up to all our various
evidence procedures, because it is my idea that if its really
real, then it'll really, really work - no questions asked :-)))

Thanks for that, Mary, really happy to have been given an
opportunity to say that again.

a bright day to all constructs, big and small, in their own
totality contexts :-)

Silvia

-----------------------------------------

           
Received on Wed Jun 11 2003 - 06:38:24 BST