Change font size

Increase size Decrease size Revert styles to default
Matrixes and Individuation PDF Print E-mail
Matrixes and Individuation

by Esther Veltheim

 

 

The matrixes, as we refer to them in BodyTalk, describe distortions of both inborn,

inherited personality traits, and the inborn masculine and feminine traits inherent in the

psyche or beingness.


The primary matrixes relate most specifically to the anima/animus or feminine/masculine

psychic energies. This is because, as distortions, they relate to gender.


At birth, the two psychic energies are drawn upon and expressed to varying degrees. How

much you draw on them as a child, and for how long, is dependant upon the health of the

body at birth and how nurturing or otherwise your childhood environment is.


Initially, the primary matrixes will form. These matrixes or personality modifications

have everything to do with the way in which you are taught verbally, and by example,

about your own gender, and your gender opposite.


The stronger the primary matrixes or distortions of the feminine/masculine energies are,

the harder it will be to sustain any form of objectivity on self. Another way of saying this

is that the stronger the primary personality modifications or matrixes are, the harder it

will be to feel comfortable with yourself. This is because these matrixes will keep you out

of touch with “what comes naturally” to you in terms of the natural inborn

feminine/masculine traits and the inherited personality traits.


The lower self-esteem is, the harder you will try to cope with, or mask, what it is you

dislike about yourself. This dislike of self will, first and foremost, relate to gender. It will

have to do with the way you have learned to think about yourself in terms of “being” a

man or a woman, and it will relate to the way you act out for others.


The anima/animus energies express themselves in intellectual expression and resulting

behavior. For example, if anima/intuitive processes are not sufficiently infused with

animus rationale, then self-expression, or the personality, will be labeled irrational. This

is because the anima provides a “felt sense” of the world, and if this “felt sense” cannot

be expressed or explained in “rational” terms it is usually labeled irrational.


This label will give rise to a whole host of other labels such as “useless,” “stupid,”

weak,” etc. Because these descriptions are given to the body and gender you are

identified as, your first defense is to modify your expression of that gender.


For example, if anima/feminine psychic energy predominates in the female body, the

woman might try to adopt a more masculine way of expressing herself if these traits are

labeled negatively.


Anima expression can also be criticized in a way that is deprecating to the woman yet be

seen as beneficial in her relationship to men. How this works is that feminine traits are

labeled irrational, but the woman is taught to believe that this gives her a mystique vis-a-

vis the male. What this mystique is, is that seeming “irrationality” complements male

logic, and makes the man feel more powerful and superior.


The more the woman falls under the spell of this delusion, the stronger the primary

female matrix will probably become. How this matrix will more than likely manifest will

be in terms of a female role-play of subservience or simpering, and poor self-expression.


If this primary matrix becomes very strong, the feminine/anima traits that are being

parodied in female roles will become increasingly hard to ignore and disown. The way

the feminine psychic energies will then express themselves is by projecting themselves

onto others. The stronger the matrix, the more volatile the anima energies will become,

and this volatility will be mirrored in others, and in the body of the person who is

disowning them. This can result in health problems, abusive relationships, and a sense of

the world being hostile.


By this point it must also be noted that the animus/masculine energies inherent in her

psyche will have also been modified into a male matrix. This is because the woman will

have been given to understand that as an “irrational” being she is incapable of animus

rationale or logic. The male matrix is probably going to be fairly weak in comparison to

the female one, however, if the woman’s focus is primarily directed towards her parody

of female gender roles or the female matrix.


Alternatively, the male matrix might be quite strong if the woman feels she needs to

sustain some form of control over her life. The female matrix will have everything to do

with the idea of controlling (as all matrixes do), because it is the result of conformism,

and the need to please, and thus to feel in control of her emotions. However, the woman

will probably rarely experience being in control, especially if she is doing a really good

of acting out roles that are in direct conflict with her inborn personality traits. For this

reason, the strength of the male matrix will probably grow in direct proportion to the

inability of the woman to experience control via the female matrix.


The more uncomfortable and distressing this dynamic becomes, the more likely it is that

the woman will start developing secondary matrixes. These secondary matrixes will be

colored by the primary matrixes in that they will also relate to issues of control. The

secondary matrixes, however, do not specifically have to do with gender roles but have

more to do with the idea of embellishing on the personality in any way possible.

In one way, the secondary matrixes are embellishments on the primary matrixes. This

means that they are actually an extension of them.


In another way, often times, rather than embellishing on the primary matrixes, the

secondary matrixes are adopted in order to temper the primary ones. For example, if a

woman begins to feel conflict as the result of her primary female matrix, she might try to

draw on the anima energies that are more natural to her. Finding herself incapable of this

because the female matrix is too strongly suppressing it, she will probably opt for trying

to draw on the animus psychic power.


However, the feminine/anima energy predominated in self-expression in childhood, and

was related to her gender, and compared to her gender opposite. This resulted in her

focusing on modifying the inborn anima traits and parodying them in female role-play.

Because this role-play was subservient to the male, it meant that she simultaneously

disowned the power of the animus.


Another way of putting this is: Her primary, habitual mode of self-expression and her

strongest matrix will probably be the female one. Because its distortions or modifications

have come about in relation to the male, she is unlikely to feel herself capable of drawing

on anything that relates to male rationale. This means that she will be incapable of

drawing on inborn animus traits and, at best, will have to settle for parodying male roles

in accordance with what she has learned to believe about men.


In BodyTalk, if innate indicates that the female matrix is a priority, it means that the

woman’s state of balance at the time of the session is conducive to the onset of the

process of becoming conscious of that primary gender modification. In isolating the

matrix from the male primary matrix and other secondary matrixes, the primary female

matrix is highlighted.


In BodyTalk, practitioners often think in terms of severing the ties with the primary

matrix and related matrixes, and of dispelling the primary matrix. However, the primary

matrix is nothing more than a learned modification and a distortion of an inborn aspect of

the two psychic energies. As a learned distortion, it has no separate existence to the

psychic energy it pertains to.


For example, learned female roles are nothing but a parody of inborn feminine traits

inherent in the psyche. Although these roles or parodies seem to transform the psychic

energies, actually the seeming change that occurs does not change the nature of the anima

in any fundamental way. This is because the matrixes are still aspects of the psyche.


When the anima energy is disowned, it is projected into the body and, eventually,

manifests in the seeming limitations of disease. It is also projected outward and manifests

in behavior in self and others that is seemingly repressive. All that is happening is that the

anima’s suppression is being reflected in the mirror of the world. But this has not

changed the anima energies in any fundamental way at all.


Why the anima energies have changed in no fundamental way is because they relate to

the intuitive processes and one’s “felt sense” of the world. The un-owned anima is

projected into the body and outward onto others and inward in terms of behavior

modifications. But this doesn’t change the anima in any fundamental way. All that

happens is that the anima’s power of providing a deep “felt sense” is simply being

amplified and reflected in the “outer” world in a way that is more tangible.

 

Why this is, is because the anima needs to be drawn upon if the human being is to

become conscious. Because “coming into consciousness” is natural, and is what innate’s

healing abilities are all about, the anima persists in trying to be acknowledged. The longer it takes for the person to acknowledge and draw on this psychic power, the more tangible and detrimental these un-owned energies become. This is because they need to get the

attention of the person if they are to “wake up” to themselves.


When the anima stirs up sufficient trouble that it becomes impossible not to try and

change one’s life experience, this is when a person often tries to draw on the animus

energy. Unfortunately, this masculine energy will have been related to male roles, and

these roles will have triggered the need to embellish in some way on female roles. This

will have brought about suppression of the anima, and simultaneously closed the way for

the person to draw on the animus. The animus will have been equated to something that

is either impossible or dangerous to connect to, because it has been seen to be in direct

conflict, or dominant, to the anima. Consequently, in order to “come into consciousness,”

first of all the woman will have to draw on the power of the anima energies before this

fear can be put into context in relation to the animus.


For example, young boys in western societies are usually equated with the animus traits.

This is because, in general, men are considered to have superior abilities when it comes

to rational thought and the ability to compartmentalize things in such a way that their

emotions don’t get in the way of their interactions in the world.


Because this type of thinking predominates in the west, young boys are often taught that

emotions are “bad” and should not be overtly expressed. They are also often taught that

they need to be the caretakers of women who are, by nature, irrational and less capable of

interacting in a grounded, “rational” way in the world.


These attitudes describe the superimposition of male roles upon the animus traits. That is,

the masculine/animus energy is equated with male dominance and superiority of intellect.

Consequently, many young boys who have a parent, or parents, who subscribe to this

type of thinking, are going to learn by example from the parents that they need to act and

express themselves in a rational, dogmatic, domineering or “macho” way. This is because

the parent, or parents, will probably be acting out male and female roles that are in

accordance with this type of misinterpretation of the animus.


Because the parents or primary caregivers of the boy serve as his mirror, and thus his

primary identity, the boy is, more than likely, going to begin mimicking what he sees in

the “mirror” his parents are providing him.


If the boy’s nature has a predominance of anima energies, he will probably experience

tremendous conflict within himself if this happens. This will probably translate into

conflict with the parents—his mirror. Subsequently, this conflict will either result in the

boy assuming the male role he is being taught, and thus conforming; or the boy may rebel

and start parodying the female roles that are his parent’s misinterpretation of the anima

traits the boy is expressing. That is, he will probably assume a stronger female than male

matrix.


If he starts to parody female roles (develops a female matrix), the conflict with his

parents will no doubt escalate. Experiencing inner conflict at not wanting to disappoint

the parents, the boy will also have this conflict mirrored back at him in his parent’s

attitudes towards him. Because the boy is going against his inborn anima “felt sense” of

what comes naturally to him, this will give rise to tremendous confusion—the absence of

logical rationale. As a result he will feel incapable of drawing on the inborn animus/male

psychic powers and will start to assume a male matrix as a substitute.


When anima energy is disowned and starts being parodied and projected outward, its

expression is usually exaggerated. This means that the young boy might find his parody

of the anima (female matrix) results in him thinking he has homosexual tendencies—has

stronger female tendencies than male.


Conversely, if he tries to conform, and begins parodying the masculine/animus energies

in “acceptable” male roles (matrix), he will probably act out in a way that is aggressive or

domineering towards women. This is because he is trying to suppress the feminine

energies that at first predominated in his nature. This dynamic will serve to strengthen the

conflict he faces in suppressing the two inborn psychic energies. It will also set up a

personality conflict, or split, between the two matrixes that have formed in order to

parody the anima/animus.


Do please note that I am only giving one clear cut example here, as a possible scenario,

for how the matrixes are used to “hide” the psychic energies. There are numerous

variations on this theme.


Because the matrixes—be they primary or secondary—are learned and assumed

distortions of the innate psychic powers, it means that they are not other than them. I

know I have talked of these psychic powers being “suppressed” and “dis-owned” but I

am not inferring that they have been overridden by something other than themselves.


The word matrix denotes a cast or a shape that is formed out of an existing substance.

Relatively speaking, the anima/animus energies can be considered entities in that they

infuse the psyche or beingness, and seem to divide it into masculine and feminine. This

division” is inherent at birth, and the anima/animus energies have no bearing on

inherited familial traits. At birth, therefore, the anima/animus energies are uncolored by

personal traits, but serve to complement them.


Because these psychic energies or powers have no bearing on the personal, their

expression is not limited or restricted to any culture, society, or environment. What this

means is that, to get in touch with, or consciously draw on these energies, is to begin to

transcend” the personal.


Because personalized roles are limiting, and limited to societies and cultures, if “coming

into consciousness” is the goal, the anima/animus energies must be owned. That is, you

have to become conscious of them and draw healthily on these two powerful “entities.”

In a clinical setting, it will not always be appropriate, or helpful, to talk in these terms to a client. However,

as a BodyTalk practitioner, if you have an understanding of the anima/animus energies, it

can only benefit you when innate indicates that a matrix is the priority. The way in which

you can explain the BodyTalk dynamics at this point to a client is by talking to them

about “getting in touch with what comes naturally to you.”


Basically, when a matrix is indicated as a priority it means that innate is ready to have a

personality modification isolated and thereby highlighted. When a matrix in the body is

addressed and you “tap out” the client, the “tapping out” is part of the synchronistic

dynamic of innate.


What this means is that, because innate is ready to address a matrix, and requires

secondary” input, you the practitioner fall in with this synchronicity of events. To

understand this is to realize that the session is both out of your hands and out of the hands

of the client.


If, as a practitioner, you consider the concept of addressing the matrixes to mean that you

are effecting change in the client, this agenda will be part of that synchronicity. This does

not mean that your agenda is inappropriate to the process, because it could not unfold in

any other way than it is—with you as part of the synchronicity of events.


If you understand that the client’s “coming into consciousness” can be facilitated by the

addressing of the matrixes, this understanding can also give rise to strong agendas on

your part. However, if you understand that the matrixes are merely a distortion of the

innate energies of the psyche, and that this means that the psyche has undergone no

fundamental change as a result of the matrixes, your focus is less likely to be concerned

with bringing about change.


Instead, you might recognize that the addressing of the matrixes will merely serve to

highlight personality distortions (which is what the matrixes are). When this happens, the

client usually finds that he or she has increasing difficulty in acting those distortions out.

This is because these roles will start to feel limiting and limited and, consequently, there

is every possibility that behavioral habits will begin to change.


Because behavior is something that is always changing, no real change can be said to

occur. A relative change between one form of behavior and another will be apparent.

However, no fundamental change will have taken place.


The psyche, or beingness, is. nothing more than a mass of undifferentiated consciousness

that has assumed the appearance of duality or differentiation because it has been given

the name “me.” This “me” is considered to be capable of being more or less conscious.

But because the psyche is by nature undifferentiated consciousness, this idea is faulty.

That the psyche, labeled “me,” is nothing more than an undifferentiated mass of

consciousness, means that the “me,” or self, is nothing but a thought or a bundle of names.


These names or thoughts are not other than undifferentiated consciousness. Paradoxically,

they give this consciousness the appearance of duality. The perception of the

undifferentiated, impersonal mass of consciousness is thus divided up into dualistic

concepts which are labeled personal and attributed with gender traits. This changes the

impersonal undifferentiated consciousness in no fundamental way.

 

Because the word mind describes the thinking processes, with a little thought, it isn’t too

difficult to understand that the mind cannot have caused itself. That is, thinking cannot

have given rise to itself because nothing can act upon itself. Neither can the mind have

subjective knowledge of itself, because to do so it would have to be apart from itself, and

other than itself.


You seem to know about yourself by means of the mind. To know about something

describes subjective knowledge. The term subjective knowledge describes separateness

between a knower, and a known. The confusing thing is that you believe you are both the

cause of knowledge, and the mind, which gives rise to subjective knowledge. This means

that you believe that you are both a cause and an effect.


When something is deemed the cause of something else, this dynamic describes cause

and effect. The word cause denotes “attributing responsibility to.” The word blame has

the exact same meaning. Although praise is an expression of approval, the act of praising

is actually no different to, or is just a variation on, blaming. This is because both concepts

denote the attributing of responsibility to something.


You might argue that praise and blame are different because praise describes a virtuous

responsibility whereas blame describes the opposite. In response to such an argument, let

us look at the dynamic of love.


When you say you love someone, what you mean is that they make you feel a certain way.

In essence, to tell someone you love them is, therefore, to say that they have power over

your emotions. This is clearly a heavy trip to lay on someone, but despite this, most

people believe that love is something to be sought after, and that it is a desirable thing to

offer others. This gives you one definition of the ego or false self—masochist!


Let’s say that you are deeply “in love” with someone. You tell them frequently how they

make you feel, and while you are doing this, you think they will be overjoyed that your

words will help them to feel special. As it is, the people we love usually do feel special

when we voice loving words to them—such as “you make me feel so good!”


Few people, be they the recipient of such words, or the bearer of them, think that the term

you make me feel” has anything to do with blame, or victim consciousness. However,

this is exactly what these words denote, because you are attributing another with being

responsible for, and the cause of, your emotions. This makes them “to blame” and,

because you are identified as your emotions and the beloved is deemed responsible for

them, that makes you a victim.


I know this looks like a cynical view of love, but unfortunately, if you are sincere about

becoming conscious,” you have to understand humanness as deeply as possible. Because

the concept of love is pivotal to most people’s “existence,” it is one of the aspects of

humanness that you are eventually going to have to look at deeply. As you are reading

this, this appears to be the time!


Now let’s look at the opposite of love, which is named hate. When the so-called beloved

starts acting in ways that displease you, love starts to undergo change, or so it seems. At

first you might blame yourself, or you might begin by blaming them, and then blame

yourself. Either way, as soon as something about the beloved displeases you, you are apt

to experience overt blame. Overt, of course, is the key word here because, until this point,

you make me feel” hasn’t been categorized as blame.


When overt blaming gets underway, suddenly the love experience seems to be permeated

by hate. Sometimes, of course, it seems as if love and hate interchange if you are trying

desperately to remedy the situation. But because these two contradictory experiences

can’t co-exist, this brings about even more confusion.


What is helpful to understand is that both so-called love and hate have one thing in

common: they are both underlain and permeated by need. And the need is for the “other”

to make you feel a certain way. Clearly, when hate is experienced, neediness is pretty

easy to recognize. It isn’t that most people are oblivious to neediness when love is the

experience, but usually neediness isn’t the description you give it. And after all, most

people believe that telling someone “you make me feel” and “don’t ever leave me” is

something the other person will delight in hearing. This is because you like to think, or

hope, the other person feels exactly the same way.


In short, whether you are covertly blaming the “other” in terms of love, or overtly

blaming them in terms of hate, the dynamic is essentially the same. You experience being

the victim, and this experience—be it love-ly or otherwise—perpetuates neediness. It also

perpetuates the idea that cause and effect are real.


You say “I AM in love” and identify as the experience of love. What this means is that,

when you tell the other that they are responsible for this experience, you are essentially

saying that they are the cause of your identity. In other words, you are blaming them for

your experience of yourself. Because you like this experience, and like yourself when

you are having it—and because you are identified as the experience—it becomes

imperative that the other person sustain the experience for you.


What this means is that the other person has to continue acting in ways that please you if

you are to maintain the identity you have adopted. This dynamic is called love, which is

considered a wonderful, desirable experience. Actually, as you can probably tell, it is far

from desirable, because the “love” you are offering to the other, and asking them to give

you, is full of conditions.


I will love you as long as you act a certain way” is basically what love is all about. You

might argue that in some cases people manage to carry on loving in the face of incredible

abuse, and regardless of what the other person is doing. However, perhaps you will now

take into account the idea that the love experience is so coveted precisely because it gives

you a special identity. Love is considered virtuous and special, so as long as you are

loving, you have the possibility of adopting these concepts and adding them to your

identity. This means that the so-called “unconditional love” people offer others in the

face of abuse or other unpleasant actions is never free of conditions.


The condition that always goes hand in hand with love is that, if you love someone, it

should make you feel special, useful, and better than you feel when you are not loving.

Clearly, such a demand has to be underlain by fear of the alternative experience. Because

love is always conditional and underlain by fear, it is impossible that love is not

permeated by blame and neediness. It is also impossible for love not to give you the

identity of victim, and equally impossible that the so-called beloved is not deemed “to

blame.”


Of course, this line of reasoning is one that very few people will come upon, and it is

probably not one you are enjoying pondering. But my point here is to give you a deeper

understanding of ego or the false self. The nature of ego is fear, and the concepts of

coping, control, and neediness, are outcroppings of this emotion. This means that the ego

is nothing more than this bundle of undesirable concepts.

 

Because the nature of ego is dualistic, it relates to the idea of separateness, which is

undesirable. Because everyone experiences the undesirability of separateness, everyone

has a vested interest in masking or coping with this experience. One of the best ways of

doing this is to give the ego a positive identity. You can do this by consciously using the

power of positive thinking. Another alternative is that you can spend your time looking

for, and trying to maintain, the love experience, which pastime is really no different to the

power of positive thinking. Either way, you are trying to convince yourself that who you

are is worthy, virtuous, and special. This is a description of coping or masking, and

coping is one more description of the fundamental nature of ego.


The concept of coping relates to the idea of cause and effect. You cope with your

emotions because you believe they “make you feel” a certain way, and that you cause

these feelings. At the same time you are identified with the thoughts and emotions that

you experience. This means that you believe yourself to be both a cause and an affect.


That you believe that emotions “make you feel,” means you believe you are the victim of

your emotions. The word victim denotes someone who undergoes harsh or unjust

treatment. In this sense, if you are experiencing emotions you like, you might say it is

anathema to call yourself a victim of emotions. However, because desirable emotions are

always underlain by the need to sustain them, they are also underlain by fear. This means

that, however nice the emotion you are feeling might be, it is rooted in fear.


To some degree or another, fear is always experienced by someone who is in victim

mode. Because all emotions are rooted in fear, regardless of how much you like an

emotion, as long as you believe emotions “make you feel” (i.e. you are identified with

them), you are in victim mode. Whether emotions are overt, subtle, or imperceptible,

emotions are always being experienced. Because the ego or false self is the sum of all

experiences, this means that the ego is synonymous with victim.


Consciously or unconsciously, the victim mode or identity is never free of blame. Either

the victim blames another for “making” them a victim, or the victim blames him or

herself for acting in a way that is unacceptable. When self-blame is present, you are

basically crediting yourself with being both the cause and the effect of an experience.

Another way of saying this is that you consider yourself to be both blameworthy (the

cause of an experience), and a victim (the result or effect of an experience).


Clearly you cannot be both a cause and an effect. Neither can you be both someone who

is a victim, and someone who is to blame. In other words, you cannot possibly be any

concept you are identified as. Because victim and blame consciousness describe the

nature of ego, it means that the ego is non-existent. This is why another word for ego is

the “false” self: because it is NOT YOU.


If you understand this so far and it rings in some way “true” to you, then you will

intellectually recognize that the psyche or this beingness – called “self” – is NOT YOU.

You will also realize that who you Really are has to be beyond concepts. When we talk of

the anima/animus energies and the matrixes, what we are talking about are various facets

of the false self. The overtly false facets of this “self” are the learned roles that you act

out habitually. These, in BodyTalk, we talk of as being the personality matrixes, which

are learned ways of behaving, as opposed to inborn traits.


What is less overt in the psyche, once the matrixes are formed, are the psychic energies.

That is, they manifest overtly, in the “mirror” of the world. Until you recognize the

dynamics of mirroring, the reflection of these psychic energies is blamed/disowned by

being projected onto others, or onto the body. Because these psychic energies are inborn

and are not colored by personal traits at birth, they can, relatively speaking, be

considered somewhat impersonal. This is because their expression is not unique to

anyone.


The only time the anima/animus energies are considered very personal is when they start

being drawn on to a slight degree only. This is because they will continue to be somewhat

colored by the existing matrixes. The anima/animus energies are the most natural aspect

of the psyche or beingness because they are not unique to anyone and because they are

innate or inborn. For this reason, if you want to know “what comes naturally,” or if you

want to “come into consciousness,” you need to investigate the humanness as deeply as

possible.


To do this you need to “become conscious” of the distortions of anima/animus that are

called personality matrixes (learned and adopted roles that parody the natural, inborn

psychic energies). When, in whatever way, these distortions are highlighted, their

unnaturalness and limitations become obvious. This makes it very difficult to continue

acting out in habitual ways.


When sufficient of the matrixes have been highlighted, and learned, habitual roles

subside, it is possible to start, consciously, drawing on the energies that permeate the

psyche—instead of unconsciously parodying them. This brings about a clarity in the

thinking processes, because the anima/intuitive power is then able to infuse the animus

trait of rational, practical thought and bring about deep insights into learned information.

Similarly, the animus trait of rational thought gives the anima added dimension in that

one’s “felt sense” of things begins to make rational sense. In other words, relatively

speaking, the mind is steadier.


This mental clarity—provided by the interfacing of anima/animus energies—illuminates

the mind. The mind, which was once full of thoughts that name “self” real and thoughts

truths,” begins to fill with questions that shed doubt on the thinking processes and their

seeming “truths.”


As a result of this mental clarity, and the ability to cut through the darkness of ignorance

by means of questions, the mind continues to clarify. Eventually, if this process of

questioning continues to unfold, all thoughts are realized to be not only untruths, but non-

existent. Because thoughts are what divide the perception into duality, duality is also

realized to be non-existent.


This realization then highlights the dynamics of anima/animus, as well as the colorings

that have arisen from inborn, inherited personality traits. The realization that duality is

non-existent then does the work of highlighting these dualistic concepts to such a degree

that the mind is experienced as being impotent in the face of these conflicting aspects

within the thinking processes.


Once the mind’s insanity and impotence are suff>8 E@@F@E}P Ciƀ |/W3E

considered a “truth.” Finding no (animus) rationale in any thought whatsoever, and

finding the (anima) intuition incapable of touching the Truth, the psychic energies and

inherited personality traits that dictate expression of the thinking processes subside.

When this happens, the mind empties of all thoughts, and the perception ceases being

named. Because the perception is no longer being named, its dualistic nature ceases to be

apparent.

%3>8 E~@@F@E}P Ùiƀ |/WCp style="margin-bottom: 0in">When this “happens,” perception of the false self, or “me,” ceases being apparent AS

SUCH. Duality ceases being apparent AS SUCH. This changes the Perception in no

fundamental way at all because It has always been an undifferentiated, non-dual mass of

consciousness, and You are That.


Although the term “non-dual, undifferentiated mass of consciousness” is used here to

describe Self, do remember that no thought, and no name, is capable of naming or

explaining the Truth. In order for this Truth to reveal ItSelf, you need to investigate the

humanness that masquerades as “truth” and appears to hide Reality from you. To do this,

you have to become conscious of the limitations of the personality matrixes.


By means of BodyTalk, and the practice of consulting the innate wisdom inherent in the

psyche, you have the potential of undertaking this investigation in a way that is very

different to other “pathways.” As a BodyTalk practitioner, you also have the potential of

serving as an intermediary between the client’s innate, and your own. This means that

your role as a practitioner is potentially that of also helping others to “come into

consciousness.”


However, this idea is unhelpful and detrimental to the process of “coming into

consciousness.” This is because the role of “helper,” like any role, is nothing but learned

habits of behavior which relate to the matrixes. To remain cognizant of this will assuage

the problem of becoming goal-oriented in practice. Added to this it is very helpful to

remember that “the client” is nothing more than a mirror in which your own psyche is

reflected.


 
< Prev   Next >