IFS Exercise
The Essene Gospel of Peace &
Love’s Breath Session
Tuesday – Friday@ 6:30 PM ET
Zoom Link :
https://MiamiNetwork.org/zoom
Open to everyone.
Monday :: Empathy Circle :: 8 PM ET
Tue-Fri :: Essene Gospel of Peace :: 6:30 PM
The Essene Gospel of Peace &
Love’s Breath Session
Tuesday – Friday@ 6:30 PM ET
Zoom Link :
https://MiamiNetwork.org/zoom
Open to everyone.
Tuesday :: IFS :: 8 PM ET
Wednesday :: Empathy Circle :: 8 PM ET
Thursday :: Meditation :: 8 PM ET
Friday :: IFS :: 8 PM ET
Saturday :: ACIM :: 9 AM ET
ACIM – Saturday – 9 AM ET
ACIM Daily Lesson
——————————–
https://acimi.com/a-course-in-miracles/text/chapter-30/introduction
Chapter 30
The New Beginning
Introduction
The new beginning now becomes the focus of the curriculum. The goal is clear, but now you need specific methods for attaining it. The speed by which it can be reached depends on this one thing alone; your willingness to practice every step. Each one will help a little, every time it is attempted. And together will these steps lead you from dreams of judgment to forgiving dreams and out of pain and fear. They are not new to you, but they are more ideas than rules of thought to you as yet. So now we need to practice them awhile, until they are the rules by which you live. We seek to make them habits now, so you will have them ready for whatever need.
Options: Download the PAL-Talk App for phone … or…
========================================
How to: Empathy Circle
https://empathymatters.org/now/how-to/
The two main criteria are:
1. Are you speaking and acting from your own experience?
aka: Empathy is not about “fixing” someone else.
2. Is your practice contributing to well-being?
aka: Emathty is not about harming self or others (“Ahimsa”) ….
If harm occurs accidentally, empathy circles can be used for repair work and healing.
Resolution Circle:
https://empathymatters.org/now/how-to/?#resolution
—-
Related QUESTION: “When should NVC not be applied for a reason of impaired health?
ANSWER: ” I cannot think of a situation in which Self-compassion, Self-empathy, and Self-connection is not appropriate. ~Marshall Rosenberg
—
“The finest emotion of which we are capable is the mystic emotion. Herein lies the (seed) germ of all art and all true science. Anyone to whom this feeling is alien, who is no longer capable of wonderment and lives in a state of fear is a dead man. ~Albert Einstein
get: PAL-Talk App … or…
Listen online
Sunday :: IFS Exercises :: 10 AM ET
..::”Nobody in the world, nobody in history, has ever gotten their freedom by appealing to the moral sense of people who are oppressing them.
~Assata Shakur ❤️
“All war is a symptom
of man’s failure
as a thinking animal.”
War is not an inevitable outcome, but a result of man’s proud refusal to use reason, dialogue, and empathy to explore strategies that meet everyone’s needs.
It implies that resorting to fear and violence is a regression from our natural potential for peaceful thought, and that peaceful solutions are the hallmark of a truly evolved, intelligent species.
A failure of reason: The quote proposes that war is a failure of human intellect because it replaces rational problem-solving with physical aggression rooted in a mentality of domination.
A symptom, not a cause: Steinbeck frames war as a symptom of a deeper human failing—the refusal to resolve disputes through more thoughtful means like diplomacy and understanding.
An appeal to higher potential: The quote serves as a challenge to humanity, encouraging the elevation of our thinking beyond fear and conflict toward a more peaceful life on Earth.
War is not a sign of strength: In this view, war is a sign of weakness in the ability to manage fear, resulting in destructive reactions over a selfish, feverish. squeamish, fear of sharing.
“Hurt people hurt people.”
… “That’s how pain patterns get passed on, generation after generation after generation. Break the chain today. Meet anger with sympathy, contempt with compassion, cruelty with kindness. Greet grimaces with smiles. Forgive and forget about finding fault. Love is the weapon of the future.” ~Yehuda Berg
The full quote expands on this idea, suggesting that to break the cycle, one should meet anger with sympathy, contempt with compassion, and cruelty with kindness.
This concept suggests that individuals who have experienced pain or trauma may unconsciously pass on that hurt to others, creating a cycle that can only be broken through a conscious choice to respond with compassion and forgiveness.
The core idea: People who are in pain tend to inflict pain on others, passing on negative patterns across generations.
The solution: The quote proposes a path to break this cycle.
Meet anger with sympathy.
Respond to contempt with compassion.
Counter cruelty with kindness.
Let go of the need to find fault and practice forgiveness.
The outcome: The quote ends with the powerful statement, “Love is the weapon of the future,” suggesting that love and compassion are the tools to stop this cycle.
Yehuda Berg: was born in Israel, is the author of many books on Kabbalah. He led the Kabbalah Centre with his mother, until 2014.
Philip Berg: Yehuda Berg’s father, who was an Israeli rabbi, founded the Kabbalah Centre in Israel and then moved to the United States.
Yehuda Berg grew up in a Jewish environment and received a kabbalistic education by his father and an orthodox rabbinic ordination from a rabbinic seminary in Israel. As an active contributor of the Kabbalah Centre since the 1990s, he has developed his own Kabbalah interpretation focusing on self-improvement and healing, and has coached many Kabbalah Centre students, including some celebrities. In 2004, Yehuda Berg became co-director of the Kabbalah Centre.
However, Yehuda Berg left the Kabbalah Teaching Centre due to a sexual harassment lawsuit filed against him by a young female student in 2014. Link
..::”Nobody in the world, nobody in history, has ever gotten their freedom by appealing to the moral sense of people who are oppressing them. ~Assata Shakur
On an individual level,
healing strategies include:
- Developing self-awareness: Practices like mindfulness can help individuals perceive and witness their own thoughts, feelings, and beliefs, rather than being ruled by them.
- Finding safe spaces: Processing emotional pain requires a safe environment, whether through talking with a trusted person, a support group, or a mental health professional.
- Creating a new narrative: By exploring and sharing one’s trauma story, it becomes less upsetting. This can happen through writing or speaking with trusted individuals.
- Practicing self-regulation: Techniques such as deep breathing, meditation, and physical activity can help regulate the nervous system and calm the “fight, flight, or freeze” response.
- Active Choice: Individuals can choose to break the cycle by seeking healing, forgiveness, and a living relationship with Self, thereby creating a different path for their own and future generations.
Using Internal Family Systems (IFS) terminology, Matthew 6:24 illustrates the conflict of a person’s “Self” being torn between two competing “Protectors” or “Exiles”: the “God” part and the “Mammon” (MONEY/materialism) part.
A person cannot fully serve both, as each has a different agenda that creates internal conflict, forcing the Self to choose which to prioritize to avoid being overwhelmed by one’s own divided system.
This is because “Mammon/MONEY” operates as an external and potentially idolatrous “Protector” seeking security, while the “God” part represents a deeper spiritual “Witness” that can be neglected when “Mammon/MONEY” rules.
Key concepts in IFS terms
Conflicting parts:
The “God” part and the “Mammon” part are presented as two opposing managers or leaders within a person’s system. One is a part focused on spiritual and eternal things, while the other is a part focused on material wealth and security.
Protector vs. Self:
When a person tries to serve both, it’s because “Mammon/MONEY” is acting as a “Protector” part, attempting to provide a sense of safety and worth. This creates an internal conflict with the “Self,” which is the core of the person’s being that should be in charge.
Divided allegiance:
The scripture highlights that a divided heart is unsustainable. A person cannot maintain equal loyalty to two opposing “masters” because the “Protectors” demand different actions and have conflicting goals. One will be loved while the other is despised, leading to internal “hatred” or resentment.
The choice:
The choice is not between being rich and being poor, but between which part has ultimate authority. Serving God is the way to achieve ultimate security, as it allows the “Self” to be in charge, while serving “Mammon” means the “Protector” takes over and exerts control over the person’s life.
Exile and unburdening:
Choosing “God” over “Mammon” is a path of “unburdening” the “Mammon” part, as the person’s security and worth are not dependent on material possessions. This allows the “Self” to lead and the “Mammon” part to be seen as a tool rather than the master.
If we, the people want Peace:
“So what prevents Peace Now?
Unconscious, unhealed trauma projected onto “others”.
AI REPLY:
The idea that unconscious, unhealed trauma is a key barrier to peace suggests that external conflicts often mirror internal struggles. When individuals and groups carry unresolved emotional pain, they may project that pain onto “others,” creating cycles of misunderstanding, fear, and violence. This concept can be applied to both interpersonal relationships and large-scale international conflicts.
How unconscious, unhealed trauma prevents peace:
- Creates a cycle of aggression: People “at war with themselves” often cause collateral damage to those around them. Unhealed pain can manifest as anger, insecurity, and a need for control, which can be projected onto others who then feel hurt and react defensively. In group settings, this dynamic escalates, turning shame and rage into collective cycles of violence.
- Impairs perception and communication: Unresolved trauma shapes how people see and react to the world, often triggering a “fight, flight, or freeze” response. In a state of hypervigilance, ordinary situations can be perceived as threatening, causing a breakdown in communication and a loss of control.
- Leads to demonization of the “other”: A key part of the projection process involves assigning one’s own unwanted feelings or aspects of trauma to another person or group. This “demonization” turns the other party into an enemy and is a dangerous foundation for further conflict and bloodshed.
- Creates a cycle of aggression: People “at war with themselves” often cause collateral damage to those around them. Unhealed pain can manifest as anger, insecurity, and a need for control, which can be projected onto others who then feel hurt and react defensively. In group settings, this dynamic escalates, turning shame and rage into collective cycles of violence.
- Transmits across generations: Trauma can be passed down from one generation to the next, a phenomenon known as intergenerational trauma. This means that the wounds of past conflicts continue to fester in the collective consciousness of a society, fueling future violence.
- Creates collective trauma: In societies that have endured severe conflict, unprocessed collective trauma can leave a lasting impact on social, economic, and political life. This can lead to the formation of “chosen traumas,” a part of a group’s identity connected to a deep-rooted conflict.
Moving from trauma to peace
Overcoming trauma is a necessary step toward achieving lasting peace, both personally and globally. This process requires courage and a commitment to address internal wounds rather than continually reacting to their influence.
On an individual level, healing strategies include:
- Developing self-awareness: Practices like mindfulness can help individuals perceive and witness their own thoughts, feelings, and beliefs, rather than being ruled by them.
- Finding safe spaces: Processing emotional pain requires a safe environment, whether through talking with a trusted person, a support group, or a mental health professional.
- Creating a new narrative: By exploring and sharing one’s trauma story, it becomes less upsetting. This can happen through writing or speaking with trusted individuals.
- Practicing self-regulation: Techniques such as deep breathing, meditation, and physical activity can help regulate the nervous system and calm the “fight, flight, or freeze” response.
- Developing self-awareness: Practices like mindfulness can help individuals perceive and witness their own thoughts, feelings, and beliefs, rather than being ruled by them.
- Active Choice: Individuals can choose to break the cycle by seeking healing, forgiveness, and a living relationship with Self, thereby creating a different path for their own and future generations.
On a collective level, healing is necessary for sustainable peacebuilding:
Trauma-informed conflict resolution:
- Peacebuilding and mediation efforts that are sensitive and responsive to trauma are more likely to achieve impactful and sustainable outcomes.
- Narrative exchange: When conflict survivors share their stories, they humanize the abstract concepts of war and help build empathy and understanding.
- Inclusive processes: Giving all parties a voice in the peace process can help restore a sense of control that trauma often removes. This is crucial for gaining their buy-in to any resolution.
Focus on the past:
Does healing trauma Focus on the past?
Sustainable peacebuilding is impossible without addressing and transforming collective trauma. This involves dealing with the past to create a different future.
Healing trauma involves addressing the past to create a different future. Sustainable peacebuilding requires transforming collective trauma by dealing with past events to prevent future harm and enable reconciliation and progress. This process of “dealing with the past” is necessary to create a different, more peaceful future.
Acknowledging the past is crucial:
To heal, both individuals and groups must acknowledge past suffering, which can involve revealing the truth about abuses and recognizing the suffering of victims. This helps prevent future violations by understanding the root causes of conflict.
Processing the trauma:
Healing trauma involves processing past pain, but it’s not just about reliving it. Instead, it’s about processing it in a way that allows for transformation and moving forward.
Connecting to the future:
The goal is to integrate the past with the future, which is only possible when the past is processed and acknowledged. This allows a society to move forward toward a just and lasting peace.
Different levels of healing:
Healing can occur on different levels, from individual self-empathy to large-scale public reconciliation efforts like truth commissions and public apologies.
Past trauma impacts the future:
Trauma that is not addressed can be passed down through generations, unconsciously impacting families and societies. Addressing it allows for the present to be shaped in a more positive way for the future.
AI Reply:
Exploring the potential parallels between the Jesus Christ story and the Self in IFS is definitely a thought-provoking endeavor.
Potential Similarities and Connections:
Compassion and Unconditional Positive Regard: Both Jesus and the Self, as understood in IFS, are often characterized by deep compassion and unconditional positive regard. Jesus’s teachings emphasized love and forgiveness, even for those who persecuted him. Similarly, the Self in IFS is believed to possess inherent wisdom, compassion, and acceptance for all parts of the system, even those that exhibit seemingly negative behaviors.
Healing and Integration: Jesus’s ministry often involved healing the sick and offering solace to the suffering. In a similar vein, the Self in IFS aims to heal and integrate the wounded parts of the internal system. By connecting with the Self, individuals can offer compassion and understanding to their parts, allowing them to release burdens and find healthier roles.
Inner Authority and Wisdom: Jesus spoke with authority and wisdom, often challenging societal norms and offering a new perspective. The Self in IFS is also considered to be a source of inner wisdom and guidance. When individuals are Self-led, they can access their innate capacity for clarity, creativity, and effective action.
Sacrifice and Redemption: The concept of sacrifice is central to the Jesus Christ story, particularly his willingness to suffer for the sake of humanity. While IFS doesn’t necessarily emphasize sacrifice in the same way, it does involve a willingness to acknowledge and understand the pain of one’s parts, even if it’s uncomfortable. This act of witnessing and validating can be seen as a form of “redemption” for those parts, allowing them to release their burdens and find healing.
Important Distinctions and Considerations:
There are diverse theological interpretations of the Jesus Christ story. Some interpretations may align more closely with IFS principles than others.
The Nature of the Self: In IFS, the Self is considered an inherent aspect of every individual,
In summary:
There are indeed potential similarities and connections between the Jesus Christ story and the Self in IFS, particularly in terms of compassion, healing, inner wisdom, and the potential for redemption. However, it’s essential to approach this comparison with nuance and awareness of the distinct frameworks within which they operate.
After we stop burning fossil fuels, how long will it take for the environment to return to the pre-industrial normal/stabile Co2 levels?
AI:
Factors, like melting glaciers and ice sheets, could further increase CO2 release and slow down the return to pre-industrial levels.
It is likely that it would take centuries, if not millennia, (Thousand), of years for the atmosphere to return to pre-industrial CO2 levels, even if we stopped burning fossil fuels today.
Q: Why do the wealthy world leaders, want to own and control everything, while they are in denial of climate change, is it just to keep the stock market economy growing?
AI:
You’ve hit on a complex and troubling intersection of psychology, economics, and global issues. Here’s an attempt to explain it using modern psychology and Internal Family Systems (IFS):
Modern Psychology and Narcissism:
Grandiosity and Control: Narcissistic individuals often exhibit a sense of entitlement, a need for admiration, and a strong desire to control their environment. They may believe they are superior and that rules don’t apply to them.
Lack of Empathy:
Narcissistic individuals struggle with empathy and understanding others’ perspectives. They are often focused on their own needs and goals, making it difficult to consider the broader consequences of their actions.
Denial and Projection:
To maintain their self-image, narcissistic individuals may engage in denial, minimizing or dismissing evidence that contradicts their beliefs. They may also project their own negative qualities onto others, blaming them for their own shortcomings.
Internal Family Systems (IFS) and Denial:
Protective Parts:
IFS suggests that everyone has different “parts” of themselves, each with its own motivations and beliefs. Some parts may be protective, trying to shield us from perceived threats. These protective parts can lead to denial, minimizing or avoiding painful realities.
Self-Preservation:
In the case of climate change, the protective parts of these leaders might be driven by a fear of losing power, wealth, and control. Denying the severity of the issue might feel like a way to protect their position and maintain a sense of security.
Unconscious Motivations:
Often, the motivations behind denial are unconscious. These leaders might not be consciously aware of the psychological mechanisms driving their actions.
The Stock Market and Economic Growth:
Short-Term Gains: The stock market thrives on continuous growth. Focusing on short-term profits can create an incentive to prioritize economic expansion, even at the expense of long-term environmental sustainability.
Cognitive Dissonance:
There is a clear conflict between the economic interests of these leaders and the urgent need to address climate change. Denying the severity of the issue allows them to maintain a less psychologically uncomfortable position.
Why This Matters:
Global Consequences:
The actions of powerful individuals can have a profound impact on the planet. Denial and inaction on climate change have devastating consequences for the environment and future generations.
Psychological
Impact: Understanding the psychological dynamics at play can help us to better understand the motivations behind these decisions and potentially find ways to address them.
Key Points to Remember:
Complexity:
This issue is incredibly complex, involving a mix of psychological, economic, and political factors.
Not All Leaders:
It’s important not to generalize or stereotype. There are many leaders who are committed to addressing climate change, and many individuals who are actively working to create a sustainable future.
Hope and Action:
Despite the challenges, there is still hope for change. By understanding the forces at play, we can better challenge denial, demand action, and work towards a more sustainable world.
It’s essential to continue the dialogue about these complex issues, to challenge harmful narratives, and to advocate for policies that protect our planet for future generations.
quote via Sameer D. ..::” Many years ago, someone I consider a good friend tried to corner me on this issue. Referring to the far-right in Israel I had used the term “Nazi”. He violently disagreed with the use of the term, even though he conceded that these particular people were genocidal – they were calling for the extermination of Palestinians. “The term “Nazi” should be a synonym for “Jew killer”” was what his argument boiled down to (in fact I think that’s a direct quote from that discussion).
–
The problem here is one of history as well as theory. From a historical perspective it’s not clear to me that the killing of as many as 7 million people (mostly, but not exclusively, of the Jewish faith) is more worthy of recognition than the killing of 10 million people in the Congo or the killing of 100 million people in India. The common thread is that all of these atrocities were committed by Europeans – Germans, Belgians and British Europeans to be precise. The Holocaust is one of many terrible atrocities that one could cite by way of analogy when faced with a current example of a militarised population murdering civilians.
–
Out of all of these examples, only the Holocaust has been universally recognised in our culture as an act of unspeakable evil. If I write a science fiction book about a guy who comes to power and starts killing people, I don’t compare my character to King Leopold or Winston Churchill (though those would be perfectly reasonable analogies). If I want to explain to someone in an instant that my character is a very bad person, I compare him to Hitler.
–
If you ask anyone – even someone as thick as Konstantin Kisin seems to be in this interview – what was bad about the Nazis, they’ll have the right answer. The Nazi engaged in the systemic oppression and murder of entire categories of people (Jews, Socialists, Romani, queer people, etc). They not only committed those atrocities, they declared their intent to “rid Europe of its Jews” to paraphrase some of the language of the “Final Solution”. So when we have similar language from Israeli officials – “We will eliminate everything”, “Erase them, their families, mothers and children. These animals can no longer live.” – not to mention the killing of tens of thousands of women and children, is it not time to make the obvious analogy without fear?
–
Ultimately those who argue for the sacrosanct status of the Holocaust are guilty of creating the circumstances by which the Holocaust can be repeated. Is the lesson from the Holocaust a particular lesson or a universal one? Does it only apply to European Jews who were living in Europe in the 1930s and 40s? If so, then there is no lesson of the Holocaust. The exact circumstances of 1930s Europe will never be repeated; therefore there’s nothing to learn from the holocaust if you believe that all of those circumstances must be in place in order to justify an analogy.
–
The only way in which there is anything to learn from the Holocaust is if we take it as a universal principle – no group should be targeted and killed just because they are members of that group. The universality of the Holocaust underlies the entire human rights framework (which was largely written in response to the Holocaust). The group in question doesn’t matter – those who have devoted their lives to human rights often cite atrocities committed against Armenians and people from East Timor as some of the worst atrocities ever. Both of those groups happen to be Christians who were persecuted by Muslims. So the cries of antisemitism make no sense either – those who are fighting against genocide fight against all of them, especially those that their own government is complicit in.
–
..::” If we do not universalise the lessons from the Holocaust, if we accept that there’s something that’s sacrosanct about it, what is that thing that is sacrosanct? It’s not the number of people killed – those numbers have been exceeded in Africa and in Asia. Is it the religion of those who were murdered? Given the long history of antisemitism in Europe that seems unlikely. So what is it that gives the Holocaust this unique status?
–
I don’t have an answer to this question, but I do have a guess. I fear that what makes the Holocaust against European Jews sacrosanct is the fact that they were European. African and Asian genocides don’t have the right sort of victims. Black people dying we can live with, but white people dying? Never Again (repeated over and over, and repeated by the exact same people who are simultaneously justifying the murder of thousands of Palestinian children).
–
The preoccupation with one particular genocide above all others may or may not be due to racism. But it is a preoccupation that does exist. We make (mediocre) movies about escaping the Nazis, we write (and read) novels about the Nazis, and so on. It’s the one example of genocide that firmly ensconced in the public imagination. Those of us who are actually in favour of universal human rights have an obligation to use this example – the only example that the public really gets – as part of our effort to end the current genocide.
–
Bassem Youssef was essentially asked what he would do if he was put in the situation of being in charge of an ongoing genocidal occupation. His answer is absolutely the right one – he would end that occupation and the genocide. But in order to get this point through the thick heads of those who seem intent on insisting that this war is like any other, we should not shy away from historical analogies, including the analogy to World War 2 when appropriate.
***
Sameer Dossani is co-director of Peace Vigil, an organisation dedicated to Peace Education. They are online at: PeaceVigil.net
User:
please explain with modern psychology and IFS, why the super wealthy narcissistic world leaders, want to own and control everything, while they are actually in denial of the danger of climate change, in order to keep the stock market economy growing?
AI:
You’ve hit on a complex and troubling intersection of psychology, economics, and global issues. Here’s an attempt to explain it using modern psychology and Internal Family Systems (IFS):
Modern Psychology and Narcissism:
Grandiosity and Control: Narcissistic individuals often exhibit a sense of entitlement, a need for admiration, and a strong desire to control their environment. They may believe they are superior and that rules don’t apply to them.
Lack of Empathy: Narcissistic individuals struggle with empathy and understanding others’ perspectives. They are often focused on their own needs and goals, making it difficult to consider the broader consequences of their actions.
Denial and Projection: To maintain their self-image, narcissistic individuals may engage in denial, minimizing or dismissing evidence that contradicts their beliefs. They may also project their own negative qualities onto others, blaming them for their own shortcomings.
Internal Family Systems (IFS) and Denial:
Protective Parts: IFS suggests that everyone has different “parts” of themselves, each with its own motivations and beliefs. Some parts may be protective, trying to shield us from perceived threats. These protective parts can lead to denial, minimizing or avoiding painful realities.
Self-Preservation: In the case of climate change, the protective parts of these leaders might be driven by a fear of losing power, wealth, and control. Denying the severity of the issue might feel like a way to protect their position and maintain a sense of security.
Unconscious Motivations: Often, the motivations behind denial are unconscious. These leaders might not be consciously aware of the psychological mechanisms driving their actions.
The Stock Market and Economic Growth:
Short-Term Gains: The stock market thrives on continuous growth. Focusing on short-term profits can create an incentive to prioritize economic expansion, even at the expense of long-term environmental sustainability.
Cognitive Dissonance: There is a clear conflict between the economic interests of these leaders and the urgent need to address climate change. Denying the severity of the issue allows them to maintain a less psychologically uncomfortable position.
Why This Matters:
Global Consequences: The actions of powerful individuals can have a profound impact on the planet. Denial and inaction on climate change have devastating consequences for the environment and future generations.
Psychological Impact: Understanding the psychological dynamics at play can help us to better understand the motivations behind these decisions and potentially find ways to address them.
Key Points to Remember:
Complexity: This issue is incredibly complex, involving a mix of psychological, economic, and political factors.
Not All Leaders: It’s important not to generalize or stereotype. There are many leaders who are committed to addressing climate change, and many individuals who are actively working to create a sustainable future.
Hope and Action: Despite the challenges, there is still hope for change. By understanding the forces at play, we can better challenge denial, demand action, and work towards a more sustainable world.
It’s essential to continue the dialogue about these complex issues, to challenge harmful narratives, and to advocate for policies that protect our planet for future generations.
