Thursday, June 15, 2017

What Does That Mean?

"Knowledge must always be expressed in the lifestyle and language of each different culture for it to be accepted and believed." This is a statement by Dr. J.R. Worsley in regard to acupuncture, but it can be applied to any other field as well.
Just recently I was counseling a woman from India who had been living in California since her youth. A while before calling me she had consulted an Indian guru who had advised her to read the fifteenth chapter of the Bhagavad Gita, a Hindu holy book. The woman read the chapter over and over, but was completely confused because she didn't know what she was supposed to learn from it. She understood that it was about non-attachment, but it kept talking about a banyan tree, and although this woman was originally from India, she had never seen a banyan tree, so the metaphor made no sense to her.

At first I tried to explain what a banyan tree was so she could understand it, but with no memory to relate to it still didn't make sense. Then I switched metaphors, first using an example of rain, then of a mirror, both of which she'd had experience with, and both of which enabled her to understand what the book was really teaching. What she had to learn is not important here. The point is that in order for her to learn the lesson, the knowledge had to be "expressed in the language and style" of her existing culture for it to be accepted and believed.

I just read a Dilbert cartoon in which he tries to explain to his mother that he is neither a railroad engineer nor a typewriter repairman, but a software engineer. When she asks him what he does, he says something like "Well, today I debugged a TCP/IP network with a system analyzer," and she replies with something like, "You mean all you did was start a bot to search out bad packets?" The fact that she knew immediately what he was talking about was quite funny, especially since she knew that he was using "computerese" to cover up the fact that he really didn't do very much. It was even funnier IF the reader also knew the special language of computer geeks. On the other hand, as far as my wife was concerned the cartoon might as well have been written in ancient Sanscrit and she couldn't understand why it made me laugh.

Like many fields and systems, Huna has its own specialized terms, based on the Hawaiian language, but when trying to relate to people unfamiliar with Hawaiian or Huna we need to use words and descriptions that nearly everyone can grasp. Remember, one of our purposes is to strip away the veil of unneeded mystery from the things we are teaching.

Those of us who are teachers of Huna often take it for granted that other people already know what we mean when we use terms like "Lono," and "Ku," and "Aumakua," and we may get so involved in our teaching that we ignore the blank faces in front of us. And shockingly--to us--there are billions of people out there in the world who haven't the faintest idea of what we are talking about when we mention "The Aloha Spirit."

The point of all this is that communication is not merely the imparting of information, it is the exchange of information. The exchange does not always have to be verbal, however. It can also be in the form of behavior. If you teach someone a healing technique, and the person is able to apply the technique in the way you have taught, then the behavior of that person is their part of the communication exchange. If the person is unable to apply it, then it is up to the teacher to change his or her side of the communication. In a different, but related field, someone whose name I do not recall once said, "There is no such thing as a resistant client; there is only a therapist who doesn't know what to do."

Tuesday, June 6, 2017

Climate Change

Not too long ago I received the following cry for help, mirrored by many similar ones from others:

"Since I saw the Al Gore movie about the Global Climate Change I can't stop thinking, feeling, and experiencing this Change and all that is coming with it. I feel quite discouraged and pessimistic about the human destiny. Although I was aware of the situation I wasn't aware of the magnitude of the imbalance humanity has created and the short time we have to do something about it and if we really have enough time, determination, unity, will etc. to do something effective to preserve life on Earth.
What I most fear is the way I imagine we are all going to disappear. I know that everything changes constantly and that the climate has changed lots of time before, but the speed in which it's changing is what I fear most, and the catastrophes that are already occurring and making lots of places uninhabitable for plants, animals and people. I find myself thinking very often that no action would be enough at this moment because the disharmony is gone too far. I would appreciate any advice or enlightenment you could give me about it."

First, please get back into the present moment. In very practical and realistic terms, neither the past nor the future exist. The real world is the world that you are experiencing in this moment. If there is any good in it, bless it to strengthen it and help it to endure and grow.

The global climate is obviously changing, but then it always has. We know from geology that the Earth has gone through a number of dramatic climate changes over great periods of time as long as humans have been on the planet and before. According to the geological record there were times when glaciers covered most of the Earth (even in Hawaii!) and other times when the arctic was tropical. More recently, in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries in the area of Belgium and Holland, major climatic changes produced catastrophic floods from a rise in the sea level, costing the lives of a hundred thousand people. It is common for people to think that bad weather in their own lifetime is the worst there ever was.

Nevertheless, no one knows what direction the current changes will take, how long it will take, or how much influence human behavior is having on the changes. During a trip to Alaska we cruised into Glacier Bay. A shipboard talk on the subject produced the startling information that when Captain James Cook sailed there most of the bay was blocked by ice, and when we were there most of that ice had melted away. So there is no doubt that the Earth is experiencing a change of climate, but there is great doubt as to whether we can do anything about it.

The Gore movie was very well done and helps us to be more aware of what humans are doing to contribute to environmental pollution. It does not prove that human behavior is causing all the changes in climate, nor does it prove that the earth as we know it is doomed to destruction. What it does is offer scientific speculation.

Scientists are not super-wise. All they can do is to gather data, interpret that data according to their own rules, and use a computer to process that data into a probable outcome--based on the data they gathered, their interpretations of that data, and the rules they programmed into the computer for processing that data. That's not even prediction, it's speculation based on limited information.

When Gloria and I were in Africa in the late sixties and early seventies we got newspapers and magazines from the USA that were full of dire warnings about environmental pollution and how it was destroying the country. The impression we got in Africa was that the whole USA was covered by a cloud of soot, that all the streams were muddy brown and clogged with dead fish, and that walking outside was to risk one's life. When we returned to the States in 1971 it was a shock to see bright blue skies, clear streams with healthy fish, fully living forests, and people walking everywhere without dropping dead from bad air.

Human behavior clearly has an effect on the global climate. In addition to the pollution caused by industry and transportation systems, agricultural practices cause deserts and destroy animal habitats, land and ocean waste dumping affects sea and land animals and environments, and clear-cutting of forests and urban development alter things as well. And each of these has an effect on climate. However, let's not forget the effects of volcanoes, earthquakes, hurricanes, and tsunamis, which are produced by the Earth herself. While there is no doubt that humans are part of the problem, we still don't know how big a part.

Nevertheless, it is very important that we take steps to clean up and improve our systems of transportation and industry, to work for a better and healthier environment for ourselves and the rest of the natural world, and to support those who are working for this. It is just as important not to give in to fear and panic or doom and gloom based on what other people are saying about the situation.

Huna philosophy says we are never helpless, because we have more resources than just physical ones to make changes. After all, the physical world is only a convenient illusion. We are spiritual beings in a spiritual universe first of all. As shamanic healers our role is to heal, what we can, when we can, where we can, and how we can. If we bless the present, trust ourselves, and expect the best while we are taking whatever positive action is possible, then we are doing the most that can be done. There is no point in getting upset because we think we could or ought to do more and do it better. There's a Hawaiian pidgin expression that sums it up very simply: If can, can; if no can; no can.

By the way, the Earth is not helpless, either. She has a life of her own and a will of her own. As a living entity she can choose to be happy as a desert, a waterworld, a ball of ice, or the incredible mixture that she is today, with or without the same variety of life that exists now. We do not have to worry about saving the Earth, but we do have to concern ourselves with saving human beings and all the other living beings we care about that inhabit her if we want them to continue. So, do your best and rely on a Higher Power to make sure that everything works out perfectly, even if it's different from what you might think that means.

Wednesday, May 10, 2017

"Huna" means "The Secret"

There really is a secret process that allows you to achieve just as much health, wealth, happiness, and success as you can ever desire. The funny thing is, it's never been a secret.

As some people discovered an unimaginably long time ago, the best way to keep a secret is to tell everyone about it, over and over and over again in many different ways until they stop paying attention and forget about it. Then someone "rediscovers" the secret and everyone gets excited about it until it's old news and it gets forgotten again.

Possibly the oldest form of the secret process is found in Huna, a name of convenience given to the very ancient esoteric knowledge of Polynesia. As a word in Hawaiian, ka huna actually means "the secret." Interestingly, this particular word has the connotation of something hard to see, not something intended to be kept hidden. The process itself is described in the Hawaiian proverb, Makia ke ali'i, ehuehu ka ukali (literally, concentration is the chief, energy is the follower), which I first translated in my 1985 book, Mastering Your Hidden Self, as "Energy flows where attention goes."

In other words, to achieve all your desires, keep your focus on what you want, and not on what you don't want, a version of the secret expressed frequently in the Seth Books by Jane Roberts. Other versions of the secret process can be found in the Old and New Testaments of the Bible, in Buddhist and Taoist writings, in Yoga sutras and Sufi poetry, and of course in the works of more modern writers such as Wattles, Hill, Emerson, Holmes, and many others. One nice thing about the Hawaiian version of the secret is that it includes specific instructions for putting it into practice. These instructions can be found in the roots of a little-understood Hawaiian word, haipule.

The Pukui-Elbert Hawaiian Dictionary defines haipule as meaning "religious, devout, pious, reverent, to worship,, to hold prayers or service, to consecrate a heiau, and a church service," but this is obviously a Christianized interpretation of this very Hawaiian word. More likely, it's original meaning as a whole word was based on the word hai (to offer) plus pule (prayer, blessing, spell). That is, haipule is a term relating to a process for making good things happen.

The actual process, according to my Hawaiian uncle, William Kahili, is found in root meanings of the word. More accurately, the roots describe four ways to maintain a positive focus, which is the key ingredient of the secret.
Ha, meaning "life, breath, spirit." 
Breathe deeply and get emotionally excited while thinking about what you want, or at least feel as positive and happy as you can. When you lose your focus, breathe deeply to get back into the present and start over.
I, meaning "to speak." 
Speak the words that describe what you want, aloud or silently. When you find yourself speaking negative words related to what you want, stop, breathe, and go back to saying what you want instead.
Pu, meaning "to issue forth, to appear like smoke." 
This is a poetic description of imagination. Imagine what you want in as much sensory detail as you can. When you find yourself imagining what you don't want, stop, breathe, and imagine what you want again.
Le, a short form of lele meaning, basically, "to move." 
Whenever you are thinking or speaking about what you want, assume a positive posture and move in confident ways. When you find yourself feeling depressed, helpless or disillusioned in relation to what you want, stop, take a deep breath, and change your posture or the way you move into a more positive and confident mode.
You don't have to do everything every time you think of what you want, but each method reinforces the other and helps you to maintain your positive expectation.
So that's it. The secret is out. Or, as the ancient Hawaiians would have said,
Ahuwale ka nane huna
"That which was a secret is no longer hidden"
(from 'Olelo No'eau, by Mary Kawena Pukui)

Friday, April 28, 2017

The Identity Imperative

As we listen to and look at national and world news reports we see evidence of enormous conflicts between people who have identified themselves with very different ways of thinking and feeling and behaving. People who identify with different religions are at war with each other; people of the same religion who identify with different interpretations of it are at war with each other; people who identify with different political systems are at war with each other; people who identify with different interpretations of the same political system are at war with each other.

On a more local level, people who identify with different athletic teams in the same sport seem to be getting into sometimes serious fights with each other more frequently; people who identify with specific groups called gangs often have serious fights with each other, as well as with non-gang members of the society around them; and identity conflicts of a serious nature often arise between families or even individual strangers.

Two important questions that come out of this observation are: "Is there a fundamental urge to identify with something - an 'identity imperative,' so to speak - that is more powerful than other urges?" and "why does such identification so often lead to conflict?"

To answer the first question, the urge to identify with something--an idea, a belief, a philosopy, a religion, a way of life, a political system, a group of some kind, a territory, or even another person--is no more nor no less than a combination of the two fundamental urges of all human beings to connect and to be effective.

We have an initial urge to connect because feeling connected, feeling ourselves to be part of something else, is a source of pleasure. By itself this leads to pleasurable relationships with people, animals, plants, and other aspects of the world around us. When the thing we connect to also helps us to feel more effective or powerful, another source of pleasure, then we have a strong tendency to identify ourselves with that thing, to consider it and us to be virtually identical. That's why so many people proudly declare that they are "members" of something or other (the word "member" means a "limb" or an integral part of something). It's also why people like to wear clothing, costumes, badges, pins, and tatoos that help them feel more connected and powerful.

The answer to the second question above is that the more insecure we feel about our connection and our effectiveness, the more fearful we become about their loss, which leads to painful feelings of isolation and helplessness. When this insecurity and its related fear become intense enough there may be a very strong suppression reaction. A common effect of this reaction is to perceive contrasting or opposing forms of identity as a threat to one's very existence. 

So a losing sports team, or its fans, may feel compelled to fight the winners, or their fans, and even destroy anything associated with them. Do something that an insecure identifier interprets as an insult to his or her source of identity and you may receive a death threat, or worse. In some cases people become willing to sacrifice their lives to maintain their own identity as well as the "life" of what they identify with. That will not happen, however, unless such people have decided that their own lives have no worth in any other context. Self sacrifice with the intention to harm members of another identity is therefore a desperate attempt on the part of extremely insecure people to maintain a sense of belonging and personal power.

The more secure you feel about your identifications, the more tolerant you naturally are of other identifications. If you have no doubts about the goodness or rightness of your ideas, beliefs, or behaviors, then you tend not to care about the ideas, beliefs, and behaviors of others (as long as they don't physically threaten you, of course). 

On the other hand, the more insecure you feel about your identifications, the more you will react with fear and anger and the desire to destroy anything and and anyone that doesn't agree with your way of thinking, feeling, and behaving. Unfortunately, although this is essentially a position of weakness, it can cause great damage among those who are basically more tolerant, but not yet secure enough or wise enough to realize that tolerance is not the same as unbounded permissiveness.

Ma'alahi ka ha'ina, pu'ika'ika hana
"Simple the explanation, difficult the execution

Friday, April 14, 2017


While teaching workshops, especially when I'm teaching about relationships, I am often asked, "How can I trust people," or "What do you do when someone betrays your trust?" And some will make the comment, "I've learned not to trust anyone."

It's a difficult topic to explain, mainly because so many people are confused about what it really means to trust someone.

In its most simple form, to trust someone is to have the confidence, faith, or expectation that a person will do what he or she has said they will do. That trust is considered misplaced or broken or betrayed (depending on how emotional one becomes about it) when the person does something else instead, regardless of any extenuating circumstances. So a child may wail endlessly to a parent that "You broke your promise!" even when a parent was not able to carry out a promise for a very good reason. However, it has to be said, a lot of people, sometimes including politicians, make promises with no intention of ever carrying them out.

A more complicated form of trust is when you expect people to behave in a certain way because they have always behaved in that way, or because they should behave in that way (according to your rules), or just because you want them to behave in that way, whether they have ever promised to do so or not. I know a number of people who have been disappointed or felt betrayed because I didn't do what they wanted me to do, or what they thought I should have done (without telling me beforehand, of course). And, I have to admit, there have been occasions when I have felt disappointed or betrayed when people didn't do what I expected or wanted them to do.

Both of these kinds of trust can be lost very easily if we blame others for how we feel about their behavior. It can also make it much more difficult for us to trust anyone else in the future, because most of us don't like to feel bad, and a lot of us are even afraid of feeling bad.
Since I believe strongly that we are all responsible for our own feelings, I decided to find a way to trust more and feel disappointed less. My solution may not be satisfactory for everyone, but I present it here in case some will find it useful.

First, I looked for a form of human behavior that was common to all people everywhere. What I found was that, invariably, all people everywhere will always do what they do. Therefore, that allows me to trust 100% that everyone will always do what they do, no matter what I may think or feel about it.

Second, I found that all people everywhere will always do what they believe is best for them. This gets a little more involved, because some people believe that following their own self interest is more important than anything else, some believe that doing what others want is also best for them, some believe that keeping promises is best for them, and on and on. Nevertheless, it means that I can trust 100% that people will always do what they believe is best for them, whatever that may be.
Third, as a consequence, it means that I cannot trust 100% that anyone will always do what I want or expect them to do. Or, to put it more positively, I can trust 100% that someone at some time will do something other than what I want or expect them to do.

When that happens I limit any feelings of disappointment by taking responsibility for those feelings and reminding myself of the first and second forms of behavior above (and I never use the emotionally-loaded word "betrayal" anymore). Then my next step is to make other plans that do not require specific people to do specific things.

As a result, I am able to maintain good friendships with people who didn't do what I wanted or expected because it didn't coincide with what they believed were their best interests, and even work with them in other areas where our interests do coincide. So, trusting people to keep their promises, to behave as expected, to do what they "should" do or what you want them to do is always a risk.

Trust is very important, to be sure. Our society and economy could not function unless a majority of the people involved did what was expected of them. As individuals, I believe that we can all function better if we understand how trust works and why, sometimes, it doesn't.

Wednesday, March 22, 2017

The Enabling Power

There is a power in the universe that has a very peculiar characteristic. It enables things to happen.

Some people call it "grace," some call it "infinite intelligence," some call it "the Holy Spirit." In Arabic it's called baraka, in Chinese it's called li, and in Hawaiian it's either wai ola (water of life) or kumu uli po (invisible steering foundation - from David Malo). There are many other terms in different languages, of course.

Some people think it comes from "God" by many various names, and some people think it's just there. Some people think you have to be a special person to experience it, or to do or say something special like a ritual, or to be initiated by someone else who has it, or attain a special state of purity or whatever, or to fulfill some other qualification.

To begin with, let's acknowledge that its very existence is theoretical. In other words, it's an interpretation of phenomena. In this world of ours we all experience phenomena - sunshine, rain, gravity, electromagnetism, pain, pleasure, happiness, unhappiness, etc. and etc. Experiences and circumstances are phenomena, too. After we experience phenomena, depending on our level of curiosity, we usually try to interpret the phenomena. That is, we create theories about why something is the way it is, how it works, and so on. Sometimes these theories can be tested and sometimes they can't.

A good example of the latter would be the main conflicting theories about how the universe came to be. In the United States these are generally divided into the Judeao-Christian theory that God created the universe and its ensuing order by an act of will, and the so-called Scientific theory that it all started with a Big Bang and the ensuing order was either by happenstance or a "natural" effect of the bang itself. The thing is, neither of these theories can be tested. As long as they are thought of as theories, they are merely interpretations of phenomena, but when they are assumed to be true they become articles of faith. This kind of faith can be very useful to individuals for whom it gives a sense of emotional security, but neither one of these theories can be tested, and when the believers of either one begin to fight each other it looks absurd.

The theories of electromagnetism, on the other hand, can be tested, and for the most part they have proven extremely useful for most people around the world. This doesn't mean that the theories are necessarily true, it only means that they are useful. In fact (no pun intended), one thing that makes them so useful is that they are usually treated as theories by the people who use them and remain open to modification of the theories or the appearance of new ones. Theories of healing can be tested, too, and like the theories of electromagnetism, they are most useful when they are allowed to be modified or replaced by others as the occasion requires.

So, what about the theory of an "Enabling Power?" Well, this theory can also be tested.
The way to test a theory is to begin with an observation of phenomena, then to come up with assumptions about how the the phenomena are produced, and finally to devise a way to test the assumptions in such a way that anyone who understands the theory will be able to reproduce the experiment and get the same results.

The theory of the enabling power has been around for a very long time, and very clear instructions have been provided in numerous times and places of how to access it or to put it into action in specific ways. Nevertheless, in spite of more availability than ever in these modern times, the theory is very rarely tested in the way that it was meant to be. In the past this was sometimes due in part to the obscure way in which the theory was explained.

Here is a related quote by Kumarajiva, an Indian Buddhist: "When one is free from both evil and good, one's inner potentiality identifies with the higher reality."

And here is a related quote from the Tao Te Ching by Lao Tse: "Oftentimes without intention I see the wonder of Tao; oftentimes with intention I see its manifestations. The wonder and the manifestations are one and the same."

In Book One of the Yogic Aphorisms of Patanjali it assumes that the reader already knows about the Enabling Power and says, "It is perfectly all right to form mental patterns, so as to direct the flow of this ever-moving Life Force into form for the purpose of taking dominion, or for the purpose of setting up a situation."

All of these are rather abstract, and not easily understood without a lot of explanation.

In 1910 a man named Wallace Wattles published The Science of Getting Rich, in which he lays out his version of the theory and its practical application. In his book he says that the theory is of Hindu origin, and that it is the foundation of the philosophies of Descartes, Spinoza, Leibnitz, Schopenauer, Hegel, and Emerson. Here is a quote from his summary:
There is a thinking stuff from which all things are made... A thought in this substances produces the thing that is imaged by this thought... Man must form a clear and definite mental image of the things he wishes to have, to do, or to become... Too much stress cannot be laid on the importance of frequent contemplation of the mental image, coupled with unwavering faith and devout gratitude."
A British writer, James Allen, published a work in 1902 called As A Man Thinketh. That he had grasped the basic concept is evident in the poem he wrote as a preface to his book:
"Mind is the Master power that moulds and makes,
And Man is Mind, and evermore he takes
The tool of Thought and, shaping what he wills,
Brings forth a thousand joys, a thousand ills.
He thinks in secret, and it comes to pass:
Environment is but his looking-glass
However, while his book speaks of thought, desire, and action, it does not mention faith, belief, or expectation. Not surprisingly, Allen started out poor and ended up poor, while Wattles started out poor and ended up very well off in every way.

Another writer from the same period was William Atkinson, also known as Yogi Ramacharaka, who published Mind-Power in 1912. Although nearly the entire book is devoted to the development of desire, will, and imagination as a way of accessing the Enabling Power, in the last chapter, as part of a list of twelve faculties which need to be developed "by the man who wishes to gain the dynamic qualities," he calls "Earnest Expectation" one of the three "features of success," and says further:
Be not a mere dreamer or visionary, but cultivate desire; then develop earnest expectation; then will to act. Each of these is necessary.
I could quote from hundreds of books that contain the same idea, but here is an exceptionally clear quote that's about two thousand years old: "I say to you whoever says to this mountain, 'Be taken up and cast into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that what he says shall come to pass, it will be done for him. Therefore, I tell you, whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours." (Mark 11:23-24 RSV)"

It's hard to be more clear than that, but for some reason even good Christians either just won't try it, or still don't really understand it. Please note that nothing is said here about having to do or be anything special before this can happen, nor is there any such thing in the preceding or following verses.

If we accept the above instructions as a way of accessing this Enabling Power (by whatever name we choose to give it), then it's clear that prayer (or whatever else you want to call deciding what you want) by itself is not enough. The critical factor is belief. Now, if everyone agreed on what "belief" means, there would be less of a problem, but some people think of it as a wishy-washy kind of "hopeful wishing," others as an abstract concept of "faith," and still others just can't accept that there isn't any more to it.

And yet, it really is that simple. Decide what you want, and expect to get it. What you need most of all is confident expectation, or no doubt in your heart. If words and images help you to clarify what you want, then use them, and if words and images plus strong desire help you achieve confident expectation or remove doubt, then use them for that. The tricky thing is that you can't cheat. You can't just say the right words, and you can't just hold the right images, and you can't just build up a strong desire. The full power doesn't manifest until you have no doubt in your heart. It won't work just by using confidence like a bandaid. The real key is confident expectation, which is the same as no doubt.

To understand this better, think about an electrical or electronic device that you might have around the house. There are a lot of superficial reasons why it might stop working, but the essential reason would have to be that electricity isn't reaching the motor or the motivating component. Right now I have a computer sitting on one of my desks that isn't working. Actually, the computer worked fine at the repair shop, and it worked fine when I got it home, but it stopped working when I plugged in a firewire cord. The superficial problem is a defective firewire input. According to electromagnetic theory, however, the real problem is that when that input is connected, electricity can't get to the computer.

My wife and I travel a lot and we always have great good luck when we do, even if we experience lost luggage, flight delays, or missing itineraries. It isn't because we are lucky. We are lucky because we expect good fortune. As my wife puts it, "It's like riding an escalator. You do all the planning and you buy the tickets and you get on the plane and the rest just happens."

On the other hand, we are presently [at the time of the original writing] in the process of selling our house, but it isn't happening. The superficial problems are that the timing isn't right, the market has changed, interest rates have gone up, and so on. But according to the Enabling Power theory, each of us still has too much doubt in our hearts. Superficial doubts, like "Will we find the right house?" or "Where should we live?" are not important. What's really in the way is the heartfelt doubt that says, "Do we really want to do this?" Until that's resolved, confident expectation can't reach the Enabling Power to turn it on.

In your own life, for big things or little things (the Enabling Power doesn't care if you want a million dollars or a good pair of shoes), practice developing the feeling of confident expectation or the feeling of no doubt. You do this by first remembering or noticing things in your life that happen easily, without effort, once you've put your emotional attention on them. Then you do your best to remember how you felt after that. Sometimes it's a feeling of just "knowing" that something will happen, and sometimes it a feeling of not caring whether it does or doesn't. "No doubt" is the key factor in both cases. Finally, you practice thinking about what you want and feeling the "no doubt" feeling at the same time. When those two things click into place, stuff happens.

ADDENDUM: Our house sold almost six months after this article was written. Three months after the article my wife and I assumed a state of confident expectation and bought another house and moved in even before the old house was sold. Then we took a walk through our old house, complimenting each room, thanking it for the good memories, and saying a formal goodbye. We left it with no doubt about finding a buyer and one showed up immediately with a cash offer at a time when no other homes had any offers. We had to adjust our asking price, which was our "action" component, and the sale went off without a hitch.

Friday, March 10, 2017

Who Owns Your Happiness?

Recently I found myself getting very unhappy with someone about something. As the unhappiness grew I was reminded by myself that happiness is a choice, so of course I began to use Huna-related techniques in order to get happy again (mainly Dynamind, Blanket Forgiveness, and Permission).
The problem was, they didn't work very well in this instance. Oh, they provided relief from the major tension and eliminated the anger, but I was still unhappy.

So then I started thinking about the unhappiness itself. It was a form of resistance, of course, but resistance to what? The initial experience of unhappiness had to do with resisting what someone else had done, and that produced anger. The later unhappiness felt more like a mild form of depression. I know that depression is associated with feeling out of control, but I had given up trying to control the person I first got angry with, so what was the issue I was still having a problem with?

Finally, I realized that it was related to a whole lot of things that had happened in the world that I was unhappy about, meaning a whole lot of things that I didn't like and that I didn't feel I could do anything about. And I wondered why I had to be unhappy about things I couldn't do anything about. And then I realized that I had fallen into one of the oldest unhappiness traps in the world. I had made my happiness dependent on the behavior of other people. I had, in effect, made them the owners of my happiness, able to dole it out to me by choice, by whim, or even unintentionally. My happiness no longer belonged to me.

Well, of course, being me, I couldn't let that state of affairs continue. Nevertheless, I found it surprisingly difficult to recover the ownership of my own happiness.

The awareness of what I had done helped a lot, but the hard part was training myself to feel happy regardless of people, places, circumstances, and events. I was amazed to find out how much my happiness depended on so many little things like temperature, sunshine, food preparation, news, voice tones, whether machines worked the way I wanted them to or not, bills, bank account levels, the availability of things, whether other people were happy or not, and on and on and on. My happiness was owned, not just by one other person, but by a whole multitude of things. To use a business metaphor, the ownership of my happiness was divided among thousands of shareholders.

To continue the metaphor, I am in the process of "buying up" all those shares. My aim to to create a sole (soul?) corporation where I own all the stock in my happiness, where I am the only one to decide whether I feel happy or not. It's a process, because every day I discover shareholders I didn't know existed (it's easy to recognize them: they "make" me feel unhappy). Nevertheless, it's a buy-out that I have every intention of achieving. I will own my own happiness. Will you?