Positive Learnings can leave people better off than you found them...

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

Was thinking about Jim's question about getting people the positive

learnings and it hit me...positive learnings can leave people better off

than I found them. Also, from my POV healing someone in the moment can be

leaving them better off than I found them even if they didn't get any

positive learning (at least in the moment).

Jim wrote: don't want to do too much of the EFT on someone without them

getting the positive learnings anyway, but I think there are many, many

useful ways to help someone with EFT where the positive learning is easy

for them to come up with on their own. So I guess my segment

intending is " Is it beneficial for them if I do this

technique? " or something like that.

My question would be... is my guideline to leave people better off than I

found them or to make sure they get the positive learning? They could be

the same thing but not necessarily.

Then my next question is which positive learning out of all the possible

positive learnings would I be responsible for them getting?

Sure we can influence someone by stepping into their energy field or with

thoughtforms, etc. We can even go so far as to step in and change

someone's map, (beliefs, i.e., etc.). We can do a lot more than we think

we can. I suspect it is our limiting beliefs of what we label appropriate

or inappropriate.

The matter of whether we should or not all boils down to our own personal

map. IF we believe...

Choose a map...

We are here to learn lessons.

We are here to remember who we are.

We are here to remember what we forgot.

We are here to create.

We are here to experience joy.

We are here to experience joy through creating.

There are victims, villains and victors.

There are no victims or villains.

We need to be saved.

We only can save ourselves.

No one needs to be saved.

Some people are better off than others.

Everyone is equal.

Things happen for a reason.

Things don't happen for a reason.

Right and wrong are external.

Right and wrong are internal.

There is no right and wrong.

Energy never dies, it only changes form.

etc.

etc.

etc.

So it seems that the definition of both positive learning and leaving

someone better off is up to the one taking the action.

If someone's desire is not to do something unless the other persons gets

some sort of positive learning...

or

If another's desire is to leave someone better off than they found

them...

then it is appropriate for each person to act accordingly, since the

determining of positive learning or leaving someone better off would be

in the hands of the yang type energy, the person taking the action. From

an energy prospective yang is simply looking to balance the flow of

yin.

Just a couple of thoughts in regards to your questions.

To Your Best,

Dr. Houston Vetter

Healing and Beyond Healing to Spirituality

http://www.achieve-your-potential.com/deep-peat.html

 

 

Does pushing the elevator button more than once make it arrive faster? " My Grampa Vetter "

[Guest guest]

Doc Houston -

 

Did you see The Year of Living Dangerously ? (filmed in the '80's with

Mel Gibson, Peter Weir directed).

 

It's a wonderful film - and a good pondering to answer your pondering.

 

In it, Billy (the dwarf newspaper photographer) is talking to the Mel

Gibson character about the poverty in Jakarta. What can be done? (The

title of a Tolstoy essay -- about the poverty and misery in Russia) --

and Billy answers as Tolstoy answers:

 

" You must add your Light to the sum of Light. "

 

I've been thinking similar thoughts.

 

My mother died recently -- she lived a long and full life - very

mystical sort of person.

 

But she never " extended " herself to others. She never went out of her

way to help others.

 

So I've been wondering what the value of her religious pre-occupation

really was - if it only lived in her and died with her.

 

A Catholic would answer that her primary responsibility was to save her

soul. (And she was a converted Catholic )

 

I think I prefer a religious philosophy that is founded more on the

premise that you must " add your light to the sum of light. "

 

We must extend ourselves, influence each other actively....but

transparently ??? Transparency

 

Best,

 

Helen Driscoll

[Guest guest]

Helen,

 

Which belief works for you...

 

You must add your Light to the sum of Light.

 

You must add your Light to the sum of Light unless you don't.

 

There is nothing to add.

 

There is nothing to be subtracted.

 

You must extend yourself.

 

You can extend yourself or not. It will still get done.

 

All is well, everything is working perfectly.

 

We must extend ourselves (visibly or invisibly) .

 

There is no need to extend ourselves.

 

Do what is in your own best self interest short-term, long-term, etc.

 

etc.

etc.

etc.

 

It all depends on the outcome one has and what belief we believe will get

us the results we want.

 

 

To Your Best,

Doc Houston

 

" If you lend someone $20, and never see that person again, it was probably

worth it. " My Grampa Vetter

 

 

 

At 05:39 PM 11/14/2005, you wrote:

>Doc Houston -

>

>Did you see The Year of Living Dangerously ? (filmed in the '80's with

>Mel Gibson, Peter Weir directed).

>

>It's a wonderful film - and a good pondering to answer your pondering.

>

>In it, Billy (the dwarf newspaper photographer) is talking to the Mel

>Gibson character about the poverty in Jakarta. What can be done? (The

>title of a Tolstoy essay -- about the poverty and misery in Russia) --

>and Billy answers as Tolstoy answers:

>

> " You must add your Light to the sum of Light. "

>

>I've been thinking similar thoughts.

>

>My mother died recently -- she lived a long and full life - very

>mystical sort of person.

>

>But she never " extended " herself to others. She never went out of her

>way to help others.

>

>So I've been wondering what the value of her religious pre-occupation

>really was - if it only lived in her and died with her.

>

>A Catholic would answer that her primary responsibility was to save her

>soul. (And she was a converted Catholic )

>

>I think I prefer a religious philosophy that is founded more on the

>premise that you must " add your light to the sum of light. "

>

>We must extend ourselves, influence each other actively....but

>transparently ??? Transparency

>

>Best,

>

>Helen Driscoll