A.T. Lynne

Rowing in a thick fog a couple of mornings ago, I realized that being in a fearful state of mind can be much like being in a physical fog. From the inside, there is no visible limit, no perceptable end to it. The horizon is gone. The fog is infinite and all enveloping. Landscape features, other boats, channel markers are invisible. The vague outline of what you think you see morphs into something else, or suddenly disappears. Sounds ricochet, their direction indistinct and their source unidentifiable. Confusion becomes a dominant experience from moment to moment. Only the strident and frequent fog horn on the Golden Gate Bridge gives comfort, evidence of an unfailing presence reliable enough to guide you through the fog.

And then, all of a sudden, you’re out of it. Abruptly, you glide through that infinite edge beyond which, a second earlier, you couldn’t see. On this side of the wall of fog, the sun is bright. The details of the known world are sharp and clear. Distances, structures, relationships come back into focus. The sounds of things once again make sense, and it’s immediately discernable where and from what they emanate.

So, how do you exit the fog when it overtakes you? And, how do you reach through the fog to help another? Clearly, unless you are as formidable as the Golden Gate Bridge, it’s never a great idea to wade into the fog to save someone else. My rowing partner was just as lost as I, and, though we agreed to stay within sight of each other, neither of us was more sure than the other of the way out. We just kept rowing, letting the constant fog horn guide us back to our safe and sunlit harbor.

And, so, for yourself, while standing here in the sunlight feeling relaxed and calm, determine just what unfailing call you will follow when the fog envelops you. And, if you choose to serve another, simply be that strong and frequent resonance that confirms there is a solid and reliable world beyond the fog.

You never owe anyone an apology. If you believe there is any debt owed for your past behavior, it is forgiveness. Forgiveness of yourself — that self who agreed to participate in condemning you.

Your apology actually means that you agree to condemn your earlier decision, a decision in the dead past which cannot be changed. This, in turn, distances you from the mind that was doing its best when you made that decision. Nevertheless, that same mind is the mind on which you absolutely must rely for your next decision. And, the further you are from your own mind, the more possible it will be that you soon choose some behavior which neither you nor the other person accepts.

Webster’s definition of “apology”: an admission of error or discourtesy accompanied by an expression of regret; an expression of regret for a mistake or wrong with implied admission of guilt or fault.

Regret, mistake, error, wrong, guilt, fault. Every one of those words arises from condemning judgment about the past. And, since the past is over, no judgment of it is going to change what happened. Also, every one of those words creates a state of aversion. Thus, hoping to rectify or make amends for an unacceptable consequence while in an apologetic state of mind entails forcing yourself, or attempting to force someone else, to move toward something that they are naturally inclined to move away from. Being forced toward what repels you causes fear, which narrows attention to “fight or flight,” a decidedly unresourceful state.

The social convention of apologizing is a strong one and a rarely examined one. The less we understand the conventions which drive us, the more defensive we can be about them and reactionary toward anyone who doesn’t go along with them. Nevertheless, now that you are discovering the less-than-useful states which result from this convention, realize how much you can help others as well as yourself when you are no longer driven by it.

When you apologize to another person in an attempt to reconcile a debt, what you are really doing is playing the Wake Drives the Boat Game.  In this game, the past is seen as forever creating the future. And, yes, this is a very common and popular game. However, when looked at afresh, can you not easily see how absurd that is? If yesterday determined today, there would be no new blossoms no new season no new ideas. We are actually being drawn into an unborn future everyday, one that differs extraordinarily from yesterday. This is so strikingly evident when we look for it.

To demand an apology is actually an admission by the other person that your behavior is the wake driving their boat. The person who demands an apology unwittingly tries to rewrite what happened into something he or she can control. However, since the past is the past and your apology cannot give them this control, their resentment, instead of being lessened, is in fact heightened.

Very soon, you will commit another “sin” for which another apology will be necessary. If you are already in an apologetic relationship with someone, notice this. Notice the frequency at which you apologize and how quickly you say “I’m sorry” for little or no reason.  You may be so accustomed to using this language pattern that you even begin new conversations with that person with, ”I’m sorry….” or “Excuse me….”

No amount of apologizing will ever make this better. One or both of you will soon grow weary of this enervating game. And then, it may seem as though the only way out is out of the relationship. However, that is not so. By dropping apology from your language, you will soon be able to drop it from your life. And you do this by playing the I Appreciate You Game.

Step 1 of the I Appreciate You Game is to simply begin consciously noticing other people’s responses to what you have said or done. Especially notice the times when other people acknowledge your good work and appreciate what you do.

Step 2. When someone congratulates you, compliments you or thanks you, immediately respond with, “Thank you. I appreciate you and your kind words.” Play the game only in these situations at first. This will awaken you to how good it feels to receive and acknowledge appreciation. This also helps you develop an effective language pattern for keeping your heart open to others.

After some practice with Step 2, move on to Step 3.

Anyone living her or his own self-guided life does, at times, bump up against other people. The closer those people, more are the chances to stumble over one another’s path. Step 3 is your opportunity to restore a breach or rectify an unintended outcome in your relationships with those people.

Step 3. When someone responds to what you have done or said with anger or criticism, insult or hurt, respond immediately with, “Thank you. I appreciate you and your valuable feedback.”   This may surprise the other person, so give him or her a few moments to either savor your gratitude and appreciation or, if they choose, to clarify their response. Either one is acceptable and worth giving a minute or two of your attention.

Before you respond, give yourself at least a full 30 seconds to decide what you believe is a desireable outcome.  For example, you might desire to happily continue a project or an adventure with the person. Maybe you would like to have renewed harmony in the relationship or you would like to restore respect. Once you know clearly what outcome you would like, insert this outcome in the (X) position in the following suggested texts. A further benefit of taking this 30 seconds before you respond is that the other person will sense your investment in a solution.

When it’s time for you to speak, say, “Thank you. I see/hear/feel/now understand the consequences of my decision. Since I can’t go back and change the past, what do I need to do now for you to feel respected/(X) ?” As he or she responds with suggestions, welcome their ideas. As soon as an idea is suggested which matches what you feel you can and want to do to make amends, quickly affirm your commitment to doing it. Implement it. And be done with it.

If the person requests an apology, say, “The issue isn’t that the best I could do a moment/day/year ago missed the mark, the issue is that I am willing to make amends for the consequence of my actions. So, tell me, what constructive action can I take now for you to enjoy the rest of the evening/(X)?”  As he or she begins to suggest constructive actions, eagerly consider the suggestions, affirming your commitment to doing those you can do and creatively modifying those you can’t into ones you can.

If the person demands an apology, say, ” The question isn’t how guilty or ashamed I should feel – which is a pretty unresourceful state – the question is what can we do together to renew our friendly feelings toward each other/(X)?”

If the person insists that only an apology will suffice, ask, “Would you really prefer that I feel guilt or shame rather than being eager to make amends to you?” Listen with detachment to the answer. Then let that answer guide your decisions about the future of the relationship.

When you decline to apologize, the other person has a couple of choices. She can decide not to stay in your company. Or, she can choose to stay and agree upon an amends which will clean the slate on the issue. If you are very fortunate, your friend understands the probability that both of you will no doubt, at some time in the future, make decisions which again could result in unintended consequences. Being accepted for who we are is always the most desireable attitude to share in a relationship. Also, considering your appreciative reply and your willingness to make an acceptable amends, reasonable people will most often be willing to move onward with you. From the person who walks away, preferring to hold you hostage to shame and blame, you have received a great favor. So, with all the genuine gratitude you can muster, say, “Thank you, I appreciate you and your honesty” to their retreating backside.

NOTE:   An individual who feeds an apologetic relationship with one person may find herself using the same language with other people, too. From there, the fear of being wrong, at fault, guilty or shamed about what one does can be extended into believing that who one is also requires apology.  This is never, ever true. Each human being is as worthy of life as every other human being. When it is appropriate for you to make an amends, offer it only for what you have said or done, never for what you think or who you are.

When referring to any condition in the world, i.e. the weather, a political outcome, a popular movie, etc., cease using the terms “It is…,” “It was…,” or “It will be.. .”

Despite a certain covert attempt at cache, which alludes to your being on intimate terms with the weatherman, your congressman or the movie’s star, this speech pattern actually removes you entirely from the information you are relaying.  And, although some misguided teacher from your far past would have you believe this is the proper way of reportage, it is definitely not the way to feel yourself the star of your life, which, like it or not, you are and cannot abdicate.

This manner of storytelling is also weighted with the desire to make your statements “facts”.  However, across the full spectrum of life’s topics, your observations, knowledge and opinions are probably no more true or accurate than whatever anyone else says on average.

Instead, dare to say what your perceptions and experiences are.  For example, of the weather, it is so much more accurate to say that you find the day warm and pleasant than to say that it is warm and pleasant.  First of all, this sort of sharing elevates your statement above criticism and argument, for only the supremely foolish argue matters of taste and personal experience.  Second, any statement clearly identified as your experience leaves plenty of room in the conversation for the other person to  enjoy and share his or her own experience as equally valid.  And, most significant, as you speak from the authority of your own life, its experiences and perceptions, you will be in the delightful company of a vitally alive and self-aware person who values you.

And there we saw the giants… and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight. Numbers 13.33

How ever you imagine others see you, the way in which you are seen by them forever begins with your view of yourself.

As you awaken from the perception of yourself as grasshopper-like, you will begin to see how others hold themselves in helpless bugdom.  Do not lose your way by judging them.  Instead, understand that this widening recognition of the various states of self-perception is a gift.  Concurrent with this recognition, a deep compassion blooms which eclipses judgment.  The release from any impulse to judge, in turn, strengthens your resolve to grow stronger in your own greatness.

Be wary of anyone who tells you your ideas are meaningless, and never ever let this idea of theirs eclipse the importance of your own ideas to yourself.  Nevertheless, don’t set yourself up to get this sort of feedback by following your idea with, “If that makes any sense,” or “Does that make sense?”

It’s normal for new ideas to take time to weave into the mind of someone else.  Give both your listener and yourself time to assimilate what you have said.  Let your new idea exist in the air between you while you silently reflect on whether the way in which you presented it made the best sense to you.  Should you become aware that you could present the idea more succinctly, then clarify your statements so that your words more closely approximate the idea your mind has formed.

The collaboration of minds is much better served by soliciting the other person’s unique thought as opposed to inviting a critique of yours.  This is easily done in this way.  Speak your idea, then immediately either shut your eyes or turn your head and look off into the far distance.  Take a deep breath to signal your active, internal review of your own thoughts.  After a moment, open your eyes or look back to your listener and ask, “What ideas do you have about _______ (the subject, NOT your idea)?”  If the person begins to evaluate or parse your thought, say, “Oh please, do tell me your own ideas about ______ (the subject).”

Be mindful of any desire within yourself to rephrase your thoughts in order to gain the acceptance and approval of your listener.  More often than not, that desire is actually an unexamined intention to manipulate the person into agreeing with you.  If you follow the compulsion to change what you truly think in order to gain that agreement, you have lost yourself, again.  And, in the dark of night, it will be your own mind that you question when the agreed upon idea makes little sense to you.

Yesterday, I came across a fine definition for hypnosis on the website http://www.uncommon-knowledge.co.uk, “Hypnosis is simply the deliberate use of imagination, paralleled with strong focus and relaxation.”   This is a wonderfully concise and useful definition to describe intentional and consciously-employed hypnosis.  This is the hypnosis of the hypnotherapist and of the stage hypnotista.

There exists another type of hypnosis which is much, much more prevalent.  I choose to consider this “subversive” hypnosis.  This hypnosis also involves the imagination and strong focus.  In this case, however, amplified emotion rather than relaxation is the third element.  Instead of an intentional and deliberate use of imagination, it is more often the person’s uncontrolled imagination which is using them.  And, once that wild imagination has taken hold of the mind it occupies, it does all it can, utilizing strong focus and amplified emotions, to take hold of everyone else.  This is the hypnosis employed by people who throw tantrums, threaten violence, and use all manner of emotional acting out in attempts to get their way.

With more subtle means to generate strong focus and more subliminal means of evoking amplified emotions, this is also the hypnosis employed by broadcasters, pitchmen and politicians who have clearly imagined intentions for your opinion, your money or your vote.

You must ensure, then, for yourself, that your life’s energy is used for your own chosen purposes and not redirected or derailed by these trances being cast consciously or unconsciously by others.

Pursuant to a conversation about dreams, my friend Dan forwarded to me the following link to an article published online by the New York Times.  The subject of the article is ”a paper published last month in the journal Nature Reviews Neuroscience, Dr. J. Allan Hobson, a psychiatrist and longtime sleep researcher at Harvard.”   http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/10/health/10mind.html?em

Written by Benedict Carey, the title of the article is “A Dream Interpretation: Tuneups for the Brain”.   Of the 24 paragraphs in the article, only four of those paragraphs include a reference to the premise of the original research paper by Dr. Hobson, that “dreams are tuning the mind for conscious awareness.”  Rather than explore this premise, the article emphasized a much more sinister interpretation of dreams, concluding with the sentence, “No reason to scream, even if it were possible.”   Other words used by the journalist to describe dream research, words not ascribed to or included in direct quotes from the sources themselves include:  Divorce, frustrations, argues, argues, stirred controversy, anxieties, frantic, imagined loss, strong biases, attach more significance to a negative dream, mystery, argument, impossible to scream, heavy dose, night terrors, attacks, narcolepsy, infringement, struggle, schizophrenia, suffer delusions, unknown origin, abnormal, psychosis, ominous, strange, meaningless. 

What interested me relates to my own current research into the omnipresence of subliminal persuasion and embedded suggestions in media.  The words listed above could be expected to create a much different state in the mind of a reader than the title, “Tuneups for the Brain,” suggests.  The visions of troubling dream experiences, prompted by those word choices, are probably not ones a reader wants to keep in mind.  Therefore, he or she may want to be quickly taken into some other thought.  And, looking at the ”package” in which the article arrived, New York Times online is prepared to do just that.  Opening one’s aperture only slightly beyond the printed words of the article, one can readily see this “package”.

First, running vertically down the middle of the screen, next to the title and adjacent to the first five paragraphs, the following list of 14 links.  Each link incorporates a sign-in service and, in some cases, ads for various additional services and products.

• Sign in to Recommend
• Twitter
• comments (28)
• Sign In to E-Mail
• Print
• Reprints
• ShareClose
• Linkedin
• Digg
• Facebook
• Mixx
• MySpace
• Yahoo! Buzz
• Permalink

On the right third of the page, lists of other articles alternate with print and photo advertising.   Interestingly, the top grouping of other articles is titled “Well”.  Well, despite its seemingly benign title, “A Dream Interpretation: Tuneups for the Brain,” consider again the rather unsettling embedded suggestions in the main article incited by the journalist’s word choices.  This word choice and suggested unease  just might incite a sense of “un-wellness” in the reader for whom these additional articles could seem particularly worth reading.   Should the reader choose to review this article on another day day, a brand new list of current articles and advertisements appear in this location.  And, it is worth noting, that this location, the right side of the page, is an advertiser’s premier selling location.

This may well be exactly the hoped-for consequence which telephone utility engineer Claude Shannon and physicist Warren Weaver foresaw when they developed  “Information Theory,” for Bell Labs/AT&T.  While envisioning a system by which the greatest amount of data could be tranferred across a phone line, Shannon defined information as “something completely meaningless”.  Danish science writer Tor Norretranders states in his chapter ”The Tree of Talking” in The User Illusion:Cutting Consciousness Down to Size, “Indeed there are plenty of grounds for a conspiracy theory of the most devious kind: that the notion of information was invented and developed by engineers from big private corporations who then made a profitable business out of having the rest of us talk about truth, beauty, meaning and wisdom — on the phone.”  Or, in this case, in our blogs, websites, web posts, Twitter, FaceBook, LinkedIn, et al.  The only ”information” that matters, in this context, is the volume and duration of data a user can be compelled to transfer across the provider’s media.  For it is by the minute and by the bandwidth that this business of providing communications services is so fabulously profitable. 

Following the article are two groupings of “Ads by Google” book-ending references to related articles and related searches.  As within the related listings, within the title of these ads are the words, dreams, brain, beds, lucid dreaming.  And, as with the lists of articles and ads along the right side of the window, these at the end of the article also change from day to day.

And finally, across the bottom of the page is a selection of pictures, illustrating 12 other article titles, hot-linked to their pages.

Okay, fine, you say?  So there’s a troll who collects a few coins when we cross his bridge/use his phone wire, so what?  That’s only fair, isn’t it?

Yes.  And it is still worth questioning for yourself what part of your day and portion of your pay they legitimately earn.  To have at our fingertips these multiple, amazing and reliable media through which we may communicate is indeed fabulous.  The “what” that interests me here are the clever and subliminal methods used by these talented trolls who provide the bridges between you and me.  The billions of dollars advertisers invest annually in catching and holding our attention is irrefutable proof that they believe we can be persuaded and influenced. 

Are any of us so clever that we can be exposed to this amount of overt and embedded persuasion day after day and be absolutely certain that the thoughts we think, the conclusions we come to, the subsequent actions we take, even the very life we are living are really the thoughts, conclusions, actions and life we ourselves have chosen?  Without time to assess for ourselves the value of what we read, hear or are shown, we may unwittingly be allowing the media providers and their advertisers to do this assessing for us.  Is this truly what you want for your sweet and infinitely precious, finite life?

First, I invite you to watch this video as famed British showman and hypnotist Derren Brown remotely hypnotizes a volunteer subject, then literally transports him from one continent to another without the subject’s knowledge or later remembering.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7r4Ey4WBpY&NR=1

The subject, Richard, was entirely unaware of what occurred during 13 hours of his life, a time during which he was physically transported from London to Morocco.  Richard was not only unaware of what was happening to him while it occurred, when he came out of trance, he remembered none of it!   However bizarre as that may seem, consider that those completely forgotten 13 hours are very much like the 24  hours in a day, the 168 hours in a week and the 8,736 hours in a year that pass unremembered in countless people’s lives.  Sleepwalking day after day, year after year, they remember little or nothing of where they’ve been or what they have done and said.

Some people do wake up before the very end.  In many cases, a tragedy, illness or other life shock snaps them awake.  Involuntarily, they wake up from decades in a profession or a marriage or a long, unconscious span of time, finding themselves in a completely alien place, or body, or state of mind.  They are as disoriented and confused as Richard, wondering how in heaven’s name they wound up where they are.  Yet, they are the fortunate ones.  They have woken up.  They still have time to actually live whatever moments, hours or days they have left.  Time to be alive before they die.

Are you one of these fortunate ones?  Just how deeply asleep have you been and are you now?  To test this, try to recall, right now, how many of the events in the past 10 years of your own life you remember vividly.  Alternatively, make it easier; start with this year.  Close your eyes, and try to quickly and vividly remember one event from each week of this last calendar year.  Less than 52 events in 2009.  Just one event a week.  Richard didn’t remember anything from a 13-hour period, but, surely, you can remember something from a 168-hour week, can’t you?  Quickly now, can you remember one event from the first week of January, 2009?  How about from the second week?  the third week?  an event from the third week of February 2009?  or the third week of March?

Think about it.  How conscious – or catatonic – are you?  Are you being carried and pushed and transported through the hours and days, months and years of your life just as Richard is in this video?  Hours, days and years you barely remember, if you remember them at all.  And, if you don’t remember where you’ve been and what you were doing, who remembers?  How can you hope that your life will matter to others when it matters this little to you? 

Ask yourself, “Who has been in control of my life while I’ve been sleepwalking through it?”  Give serious consideration to who or what has been carrying you along:  Your boss, directing your mind’s output?  Your spouse, directing your social life?  The news, directing your emotional state?  An infinitude of advertisers, directing you how and on what to spend your money?

Now, consider, if you are still breathing, if your heart is still beating, if the sun has risen one more time, you still have the chance to WAKE UP NOW!

Finally, watch this next Derren Brown video and consider who will be in control when your own sun disappears.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvyHH3C3Gds&feature=fvw

I’ve been musing over a book entitled The User Illusion: Cutting Consciousness Down to Size (what I can understand of it).  It is a wondrous contemplation by Danish science writer Tor Norretranders of current mathematical thought, the various attempts at discovering the Unified Field by physicists and its translation by social scientists. 

Of course, this method of “guiding” thought processes and thus patterns of living was imbued in our culture well before you and I landed on the planet.  From stone tablets to porch-tossed daily papers, our parents and their parents’ parents were also subject to endemic thought “influence” if not outright control.  The unquestioned reliance on external intermediaries reaches far beyond current technological marketing.  For example, it also applies to medical science.  Frequently, a patient is convinced (either before or after meeting with his doctor) that healing is only possible between his body’s parts via medicine or mechanical intervention.  Yet, in the end, it is the body’s parts which must agree to reconnect in health, or not.

To remain primarily connected with one’s own mind may seem like a guarantee of failure and ostracism.  I can clearly remember in elementary school when “Show and Tell” was replaced with “World News Sharing”.  Growing up seemed to require turning one’s attention from personal experience and imagination to other people’s experiences, impressions and opinions.  Certainly that ensured more attaboys and A’s.    And yet, to the degree a human being withdraws her attention from the outside world and connects with her own genuine interests, fascinations, interpretations and imagination, only then does she have something of authentic value to bless her own life, to give to others and to enhance the world.

So, how do we prepare?  Through daily communion with one’s own imagination and its self-chosen intentions.  Going into the day lacking focus on one’s own intentions, a person’s attention is soon caught and their mind soon occupied by the intentions of others.  “Imaginative men are forever casting forth enchantments, and all men, especially unimaginative men, are continually passing under their power.”  Next time you flip open your cell phone to call or text your buddy just to say “Wha’s up?” as you are sipping on a Bud, notice the troll standing between you and your friend and consider just exactly how much you are paying him for the privelege of using his bridge.   

There is a sweet freedom in recognizing that an array of devices and multiple media by which to tranfer the least valuable parts of communication are not essential to fulfilling human life.  What matters far more for each of us is the construction of that universe within our own minds which is the actual source of the colors, textures and value in our lives.  Only as you build the universe within yourself first can you hope to both understand and benefit from the glimpses into the universes within the people you encounter.  Freed from the trance of incompleteness and the “need” for something outside themselves to make them whole, individuals may mindfully choose to play with, use and enjoy these various means and devices.  Then, one is free to bloom with or without them.

While researching the preceding blog posting, I came upon this passage from the Bible:

Matthew 5:20 (King James Version) For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

In order to experience your own Heaven,  you must follow your own internal and personally-determined path.  You must adhere to the qualities, behaviors and states of mind of what you yourself love rather than follow the dictates of anyone else, regardless of how sure they are or their status in the world.  Their opinions, their solutions, their sure-fire, guaranteed, science-proven or scripture-ordained ways will not take you into the Heaven of your dreams.