Conference hydra::dejavu

    
    That's interesting.  I know that babies born with Downs Syndrome
    or who are born retarded are often taken through what is called
    "patterning", which means that the baby's body is taken through
    routine patterns physically (the arms are moved, the legs are moved,
    etc.).
    
    Perhaps someone more knowledgable could add to this?  It's been
    a while since I read about it.
    
    Cindy

    This is skipping ahead a few, however thought it was appropriate
    here.
    
    ================================================================
    
    
{From: "Bradshaw On: The Family", by John Bradshaw, p.72-75}

Loss Of Freedom

The blocking of choice is what I call the "disabled will".  Once our 
will is disabled, we lose our freedom.  Since shame binds all 
emotions, everyone in a dysfunctional family has their freedom greatly 
impared.  This is perhaps the greatest casualty of dysfunctional 
families.

In the diagrams which follow (Figures 4.4,4.5, and 4.6) I have tried 
to give you a visual picture of what happens to the power of choice 
when our feelings are repressed.  In these diagrams I have borrowed 
freely from Harvey Jackins' presentation of blocked emotion in his 
book, 'The Human Side Of Human Beings'.  Jackins has developed a 
powerful method of working through the blocked emotions from the past 
called Reevaluation Counseling.  He uses the diagrams I have borrowed 
from as the theoretical basis for his counseling theory.  I have 
changed these drawings for my own purposes.  While Jackins' focus is 
on the blocked emotion, my concern is on how the human will becomes 
disabled by the emotionally contaminated mind.  I also believe that 
there is a higher level of consciousness beyond what Jackins describes 
in his drawings.

The following drawings are quite rough and surely are not intended to 
be scientific specimans.  They will give the reader a visual glimpse 
of what happens to our will when the mind is blocked by emotion.

The will needs the eyes of perception, judgment, imagination and 
reasoning.  Without this source, the will is blinded.  The mind cannot 
use its perception, judgement, reasoning and imagination when it is 
under the inpact of heavy emotion.  The particular emotion, which is a 
form of energy, has to be discharged before the mind can function 
effectively.  When the emotion is repressed it forms a frozen block 
which chronically mars the effective use of reasoning.  Anyone who has 
had an outbreak of temper or been depressed has experienced how 
difficult it is to think under the power of these emotions.

In Figure 4.4, we see a model of what our raw intelligence looks like 
in an uncontaminated state.  Our 3 trillion circuited, 12billion 
celled computer brain is capable of a new and creative response to 
every new experience that occurs in our life.

As we learn, the incoming data is given meaning and stored in our
memory banks.  When new information comes in, it is compared to what 
is already known, and either stored accordingly or becomes a new bit 
of stored memory.  When an experience is not resolved, it cannot be 
stored appropriately.  Unresolved experience has to do with emotional 
discahrge and meaning.  The mind cannot function when biased by 
emotion.  Our emotions are powers which give us readouts on our gbasic 
needs and move us to action.

When a child is abandoned through neglect, abuse, or enmeshment, one 
of three transactions usually take place:

	1. Mythologies are created to explain abandonment.
	2. The child is given reasons for the abandonment which makes
	   no real sense to the child.
	3. The child is told he cannot express the feelings he has
	   about abandonment - usually fear, hurt (sadness) and anger.

In fact, all three transactions are aimed at repressing the child's 
true feelings, which are the core of his inner self.

Mythologies are meanings given to events or actions in order to 
distract from what is actually happening.  For example, in a family 
dysfunctioned by work addiction, the work addict father, who is 
emotionally abandoning his children is explained away by the enabling 
wife/mother by saying, "Your father works so much because he loves you 
and wants you to have nice things."

In the second case, the poisonous pedagogy has all kinds of reasons 
for the abuse.  For example, "I'm doing this because I love you" or 
"This hurts me more than you."  In the third case, the emotionally 
blocked parents cannot handle their children's emotions.  Mother's own 
sadness is stimulated by the child's crying.  This is distressful.  So 
Mom forbids the child to cry.

In every case, the distress experience cannot be stored because the 
emotions cannot be discharged.  What occurs is a frozen pattern of 
blocked energy.

This frozen pattern clogs one's creative intelligence.  It forms a 
trigger which functions like an "on" button of a tape recorder.  
Whenever any new or similar experience happens, the old recording 
starts to play.  Here we see the force and power of behavioral 
conditioning.  Like Pavlov's dog, whenever stimulation occurs, the 
response automatically takes place.  This is the basis of re-actions 
or re-enactments.  The past so contaminates the intelligence, that new 
and creative responses are not possible.  Blocked emotions take over 
the reasoning and judgment of intelligence.  And the effect is 
cumulative.

Whenever we are confronted with a new experience which is in any way 
similar to the original unresolved stress, we feel compuslively forced 
to reenact the old experience.  We act compulsively; we do the exact 
same things that never worked before; we say things that are not 
pertinent and we have intense feelings that are totally disappropriate 
to what is actually happening. 

It's like a snowball rolling downhill getting larger and larger.  Once 
shamed, we act out of shame and create more shame.  Once a false self 
is created to cover the secret private self, each new shaming event 
solidifies the false self even more.  With each new abuse that 
precipitates anger and sadness, the old triggers are turned on and the 
old frozen record starts to play.  This is the basis of what we refer 
to as over-reactions.  Over the course of a number of years of 
repressing one's emotions, one's intelligence is greatly contaminated 
and diminished.  The frozen patterns become chronic patterns.  It is 
as if the "on" button becomes stuck and plays all the time.  This is 
what I am calling "internalized shame".  Very little intelligence is 
left uncontaminated.

    
    	The question (of course) then becomes: Considering a "childhood
    imbalance" of having one's emotions repressed for whatever reason,
    does this result in a different connectivity structure in the brain,
    than would, say, the case where the child's emotions are aknowledged
    and affirmed in an optimal way?
    
    	I'm thinking of the Pink Floyd lyrics: "You raise the blade/You
    make the change/You re-arrange me till I'm sane" - A mere data point
    that happens to hint at the result I assume is caused by this
    particular "childhood imbalance". Of course, the world now knows
    what a wonderful job the English school system does on children's
    ability to express themselves emotionally, from PF's "Wall" album...
    
    	The Big Question of the Day, though, is whether this "molding"
    while the brain is in it's "plastic" form actually cures *hard* in
    time. Or is the brain quite mallable by the power of belief, still,
    even after we've gone "over the hill" in age?
    
    	I'm preparing myself to accept that there may be structures within
    the brain that are cast and cannot nescessarily be changed by force
    of will. Certainly the higher levels of brain function, such as
    the one that determines your daily attitude, are a matter of choice
    upon the realization that choice is even possible. But, a reflexive
    reaction - a flinch - resulting from being subjected to the "random
    backhand" during a child's formative years, may not be so mallable.
    
    	Even chaos has boundaries; is limited by a structural envelope.
    So too may be the ability to change any and all aspects of one's self,
    from that which was given to us, when we developed. Perhaps accepting
    this limitation - learning to live with it - may be a more blissful
    path through life, compared with "the infinite struggle" of trying
    to change lead into gold or whatever. Certain aspects of your
    reality just may be permanent. Is this acceptable to everyone?
    
    	Joe Jas 

Though I don't fully agree with Bradshaw's model, I will say that
out my own experience there is a disassociated child-part of me 
living in sheer terror of parental environment.  Though I have had
no dialogue with that child-part, I am sensitive to his presence
and his need to be held and loved.  I believe this to be the
essence of my recovery: asking my higher-self to intervene and
bring forth that child and  help him integrate with all of
who I am.

I see this being both a psychological and spiritual recovery since
both the child and the soul-nature of myself were put at risk
in my dysfunctional family.  I had nowhere to hide except within myself
and I denied my spirit expression as a means for survival.  I now see
my higher-self bringing me into numerious life situations which
called me to confront the patterns formed in my childhood and with
work resolve them.

As some of you will recall, I ended up in the hospital in August
of '87 with severe internal bleeding.  My internist recommended
psychotherapy as a means of resolving this stress induced illness.
During the past year and half both my therapist and myself agree
that I have made rapid progress.  I feel that a large part of
this progress has been due an inner core of spiritual awakening.

I feel that both "outer" and "inner" work are necessary in my process
of recovery.  I still have ways to go and issues to clear up.  I have
no doubt that they will be cleared up.  Moreover, I have made
a pledge to myself that the buck stops here; meaning my children
and their future children need not suffer the dysfunctionality
which was transmitted from past generations.

    Hi Joe (.3),
    
    I would like to think what you say isn't true.  That we can
    change, that our 'free will' can override all those 'programmed'
    behavior patterns.  However, from personal experience I've
    seen what an uphill battle it is and the amount of determination
    and patience it requires.
    
    However, with the support of loving friends and through a
    'community' such as DEJAVU, perhaps we can 'make it'.
    
    Frederick, I'd be interested to hear if Lazaris has spoken
    directly on this issue.
    
    Ro
    

    re: .5 (Roey)
    
         (and .3.)  Well, yes, Lazaris has spoken about this.  He is
    constantly talking about the reality we are creating and telling
    us the steps we *can* take to make it function more helpfully.
    Along those lines, he has indicated that there is a path that
    is usually more elegant than others.  In 358 somewhere I "drew"
    a poorer drawn representation of the 22 steps to mastery that
    Lazaris has talked about (which corresponds to the Tarot and
    tree of life, etc.)  We are free to choose any path we wish
    on our way to Mastery.  We *could* walk through walls, but he
    says it's far more elegant for us to use the door.  So, as Joe
    says, it is probable that certain beliefs are too entrenched
    to wish to change.  The point is that they CAN be changed.
    Though the unconscious and sub-conscious played necessary and
    leading roles in our childhood development in carrying us
    through puberty, that's where they turn over responsibility
    to the conscious, which in turn we mostly avoid.  So, yes,
    it is possible to transmute, transform or even transcend
    what we feel we have been "given" but the choice is ours based
    on not only emotions or ideas, but also the beliefs which
    hold the reality in place.  Change the beliefs and the reality
    changes.  So, while I can agree with Joe Jas, I would not use
    it as a cornerstone of thought...because it is limiting and
    places a restriction on possibility.  We do not live in a
    reality that can afford limited possibilities, as far as I
    am concerned.
    
    Frederick
    

    
    
    RE: .4  Larry,
    
    I attended a really wonderful workshop this past weekend in
    which we were taken on a journey of reuniting with our sacred
    inner child.  There is a lot of pain and anger and fear that
    most of us have to get through before we can connect with this
    truly wondrous part of ourselves.  It's not that these "inner
    kids" are all laughter and light either....some of them are
    pretty p*$$ed off that we haven't been listening to their
    needs and wants for a long time!  So, over the weekend, we got
    to "hold and behold" our children.  To look in their eyes and
    ask, very gently and kindly, "what's the matter?", and to listen
    to their answers.  We need to listen to that part of ourselves
    and see if they are feeling ok about where we are and what we are 
    doing.
    
    One interesting result of this experience is that I look around
    me and see my coworkers, relatives, friends and strangers as
    little kids walking around in big bodies trying to be adults :-)
    It makes me smile.  And my little "inner one" wants to go around
    hugging all these other little "inner ones", except that wouldn't
    go over very well in one of our financial systems meetings ;-).
    
    So, from my "inner child" to your's (and everyone else's !)....
    here's a ****hug****!
    
    Carole

    Hi Carol (.7),
    
    That weekend sounds great.  Can you tell us more about it?
    Who sponsored it, etc.?
    
    If you don't feel like going into more detail here, please
    contact me offline as I'd be interested in trying it myself.
    
    Thanks,
    
    Roey (thank you also to Frederick for calling me 'Roey'.  It
    has been such a long long time since I've heard it as the very
    special person who used to call me that passed away twenty years
    ago.  It brings back pleasant memories.)

    
    Re.3 or so (Joe Jas)
    
    Joe,
    
    I believe that if you believe there are certain boundaries that
    are forever fixed, then fixed they will be and will remain that 
    way, until you are ready to give up the belief that they are fixed.
    Or until you are able to consciously recognize the pattern and make 
    a conscious decision to change the pattern and then work at doing so. 
    
    Maybe you should play the "Endless Possibilities" game too.  (;^)
    (Plug, plug.)
    
    Well, OK, maybe not _everything_ is possible.  Johm M. still isn't 
    a 5'3" warthog.  
    
    Cindy
                                                       

                                                   
    	Re .9
    
    	Hi Cindy,
    
    	I realize that.
    
    	I'm wary of absolutes, especially when it's in the context of
    absolute_truth. Yeah, I could walk thru that brick wall if I *believed* 
    I could hard_enough. C'mon...The power belief holds, though touted
    to be capable of changing physical form from mass to energy and
    back again, actually has limits, I think. That you respect these
    limits, instead of using them as an excuse or naively disregarding
    them, makes for a better overall life philosophy I'd think.
    
    	I'm talking about wasting time trying to change things I cant,
    like "hardened brain structures", if there even is such a thing. 
    Better to be aware of whatever limitations there *are*, so my time 
    can be better spent trying to change what I actually can effect with 
    my belief or will. I assume I could spend my whole life working on 
    just what can be changed, so, since there's so much work to do in that 
    area, why dwell elsewhere?
    
    	My question was meant to lead up to the idea of acceptance.
    Hey, certain things happened, certain brain structures *supposedly*
    formed and perhaps even solidified which may be correlatable to the 
    "certain things". Accepting what you cannot change (usually restricted 
    in the acedemic sense to the context of "others") and changing what 
    you can, just may be applicable to the self, also. 
    
    	I realize what can be changed, but I'm also interested in what
    "cant". I'm being a little realistic here, positively contexting
    everything for motivation's sake aside for a moment! I want to
    see *both* sides of the coin at the same time.
    
    	The only absolute thing I believe in is that there's always
    another side, *nothing* exists without a "both/and" aspect to it.
    The ying has it's yang; one cannot be without the other. Capability
    cannot exist alone for long without also respecting Limitation, in any 
    concept.
    
    	Joe Jas	

    Re.10                                          
    
    Joe,     
    
    Oh, OK.
    
    I'll slink out quietly.  Through a nearby wall.
    
    (;^)
    
    Cindy

    I think plasticity is an important idea. The younger you are the
    easier the change is, the older you are the stiffer you become.
    This does *not* mean that you cannot change, but it does mean that
    sometimes it is necessary to completely let go of what you had and
    start again (since the old paths will not bend far enough). To do
    this without extremely competent help is, I think, dangerous. Sometimes
    madness seems but a slip away...
    
    Brian

    I think you can do pretty much of anything in the way of change--but
    it takes far more than belief.  Learning from something from scratch 
    can take years of practice and exercises.  Re-learning something
    that was learned incorrectly is harder and can take much longer.
    
    For example, say you are taught to play an instrument by a teacher
    who is not very good and you are rushed by "stage" parents.
    As a result, you learn poor technique and mental tension in playing
    that instrument.  It is much more difficult to correct your technique,
    and takes far longer, than to have learned correctly in the first
    place.  
    
    As a horse trainer, I use a rule-of-thumb that says 2-for-1
    at a minimum.  1 year of bad training needs 1 year of untraining
    and 1 year of re-training to undo.  And even then, the initial wrong
    training isn't lost.  Like many viruses, its just dormant.  Start
    training incorrectly, and the problems will re-emerge.  And, the
    more times wrong training is repeated (and re-inforced) over time,
    the more difficult (if not impossible) it ultimately becomes to
    erase.
    
    To  re-learn attitudes and thinking in which you were totally or
    partially immersed for 18 or more years is possible, but I tend
    to think this is the work of a lifetime, or close to it.
    
    Mary

    I wonder if it's really maddness or if it's really freedom.  It
    would certainly frighten us in any case.  We don't really want to
    let go of the molding and sculpting.  We have all created our own
    mythologies and closed symbols to protect the child within, haven't
    we?  Why should we open the closed symbols and destroy these myths?
    What would happen to the wounded, needy, abandoned child?  Would
    we be able to continue to play those same old pain tapes over and
    over again?
    
    Madness indeed!
    
    Yoshii

    
    	re .14
    
    	Yes, we all have our rationalizations and a degree of denial
    to which we cling with all_our_might. What would happen by exposing
    the needy abandoned child is akin to the "punishment" alledged in
    Pink Floyd's "Wall" album, for the crime of showing feelings. It's 
    called *growth* I think - "The Wall" now torn down, we can no longer 
    ride the merry_go_round of self-scourge because we are now exposing
    our_selves for all to see, hear, touch and validate.        
    
    	To have *true* freedom, this eventually has to happen.
    	
    	Joe Jas

    
    	Shame as Permission to be Human (1)
    
    	What our healthy feeling of shame does is let us know that we
    are limited. Actually we humans are essentially limited. We are
    by definition limited. *Not one of us has or can have unlimited
    power*. The unlimited power that many modern gurus offer us is false
    hope. Their programs calling us to unlimited power have made them
    rich, not us. They touch our false selves and tap our toxic shame.
    We humans are finite. Limitation is our essential nature. Grave
    problems result from refusing to accept our limits.
    
    	Healthy shame is an emotion which signals us about our limits.
    Like all emotions, healthy shame is energy-in-motion. Like all emotions
    it moves us to get our basic needs met.
    
    	One of our basic needs is structure. We insure our structure
    by developing a boundary system within which we can safely operate.
    Structure gives our lives form. Boundaries and form offer us safety
    and allow a more efficient use of energy.
    
    	There is an old joke about the man who "got on his horese and
    rode off in all directions". Without boundaries we have no limits
    and easily get confused. We go this way and that, wasting a lot
    of energy. We lose our way. We become addicted because we dont know
    when to stop; we dont know how to say no.
    
    	Healthy shame keeps us grounded. It is a yellow light warning
    us that we are essentially limited. *Healthy shame is the basic
    metaphysical boundary for human beings*. It is the emotional energy
    which signals us that we are not God - that we have made and will
    make mistakes, that we need help. healthy shame gives us permisssion
    to be Human.
    
    	Healthy shame is part of every human's personal power. It allows
    us to know our limits, and thus use our energy more effectively.
    We have better direction when we know our limits. We do not waste
    ourselves on goals we cannot reach or on things we cannot change.
    Healthy shame allows our energy to be integrated rather than diffused.
    
    	1. From " Bradshaw on: Healing the shame that binds you " pg 4,
    	   ISBN 0-932194-86-9.
    
    	

    
    	I was shown another piece of the argument the other night while
    watching Public Television. It was a science show of some sort.
    They were attempting to correlate personality traits, such as
    "introverted or extroverted" to activity in the brain. Their tools
    were the NMR machine, which can map out the metabolization of
    radioactive sugar (or something) as the brain uses it to process
    thought while actively working a problem. Each of two subjects, one
    known to be a marked "Extrovert", the other person an "Introvert",
    were given a simple problem, such as counting backward from 1000
    by 7's. Their brains were then mapped according to the level of
    activity present in different physical positions.
    
    	Of course the processing activity vs physical location was much 
    different between the two subjects with different personality traits.
    The Extrovert had a greater amount of activity in the cerebral cortex
    than did the Introvert. But right then I realized, the "cerebral
    cortex" is the area of the brain that the study published in
    Scientific American claimed "remains plastic" for a time after birth,
    and it's formation or "wiring" is governed by early experience!
    What "early experience" did they one who apparently *became* an
    Extrovert recieve that the one who apparently became an Introvert
    did not? How about vice versa?
    
    	So here we go, I'm ready to put the stake in the ground that
    says: 
    
    	Our reality, as percieved by us, is as individual as our
    upbringing, and this perception of reality was formed by a
    deterministic process, i.e. it was a *given*. It was essentially
    a direct result of the environment our parent's provided for us,
    doing the best they could with what they had to work with; their
    "given" concept of reality. 
    
    	Therefore there's no reason to believe that my perception of
    reality is exactly like, or will ever be exactly like, that of
    any other human being. In fact, there's a good chance that my
    perception of reality will never be *anything* like anyone else's!
    *Parts* of it will certainly "go along with" that of others, and
    I will try to associate with like minded people (as I'm trying to
    do here in Dejavu), but I think I'm giving up on the idea of trying
    to impart my *perception* of "the way things are or should be" on 
    another person. No wonder people argue incessantly, no amount of
    time explaining your perception will ever get another to *fully*
    understand how you see it! I'm sure everyone here thinks I'm crazy
    already...  
                                                                        
    	It also means that your perception of reality is highly influenced
    by the perceptions of your ancestors. *That* is what lives on, the
    undying "spirit" which transcends the generations. Chaos within
    the structure given is what allows for the perception chain to be
    broken and a different reality to emerge for each generation. While
    my reality is *much* different than my father's, it's still very
    much the same, in ways I'm just beginning to understand. This can
    be extended to include _all_ people, I believe. 
    
    	Even the individual who's under the perception that "personal
    rights should be surrendered for the common good" or some such belief
    that to me, seems absolutely stupid, and cannot be made to fit my
    personal concept of reality. The wiring, though different, happened
    via the same mechanism.
    
    	Joe Jas