Why do I do that? Because things will get busier in the future and we may need to have new ways of “working the changes,” so to speak. So it’s useful to walk through an instance of this process.
This will be very elementary so forgive me. It isn’t the elegance I want to illustrate, but the process itself.
Cognitive dissonance has arisen because another path is being shown to me and it isn’t my chosen path. And it’s being offered as something I should take up. But I enjoy my own path. You can see the mind going back and forth with this. The more it does, the more the dissonance grows.
Dissonance comes when I see the situation from the paradigm Archangel Michael calls “either/or.”
The two paths in question are what I call the path of Nova Being and the the path of the Witness, the awareness path.
The first draws on new, usually higher-dimensional technologies. It deals with what is largely unknown to most of us. It carries the stamp of approval (the imprimatur) of the Company of Heaven.
The path of the Witness draws on stillness, inner reflection, and neutrality. It relies on observing and being aware of what happens in one’s own personal field of experience, whatever can be perceived, sensed, or conceptualized, whatever can be made an object of. It carries the stamp of approval of terrestrial sages.
You recall that Jesus talked about it in “The Third Way.” I have to say I prefer it. I’m not pretending to be neutral in the matter.
The actual disagreement revolves around whether it’s better to simply give an issue or upset away to the celestials or other guides or experience it through to completion. This interests me as a person who has studied vasanas (reaction patterns). The path of Nova Being recommends the former and the path of the Witness recommends the latter.
Dissonance is caused by the felt need to make a choice between the two. It’s either all this or all that, Archangel Michael’s “either/or.” The mind goes back and forth until frustrated.
The path of handing on our upsets is definitely the way of the future. Not saying it isn’t. But I’m encountering in myself the preference for the familiar.
The solution doesn’t have to be difficult or complex. It just needs to resolve the conflict. So no drum roll please. It’s the process that’s important.
The solution implicit in it not being “either/or” is that I can use the techniques of one on some occasions and the techniques of the other on other occasions. I actually don’t need to choose between the two, the perspective that was causing the dissonance. I can add a new arrow to my quiver.
Because it’s going to get much busier soon, I may find that I want to follow the path of Nova Being on some occasions and give the issue away. It may become a necessity some day, as project work increases.
And when it’s quieter or when the issue interests me, I may choose the path of the Witness and experience it through to completion.
As long as I came from the paradigm of “either/or,” I felt obliged to choose between the two, raising resistance in me. But when I dropped that way of seeing things and saw that I could draw on both paths, the dissonance went away. Paradigmatic breakthrough resolved the dissonance.
This is a very simple example. In this case, the breakthrough was straightforward and small but in other cases it could be large and complex.
We may encounter much dissonance in the times ahead. And we may not. The Tsunami of Love may make our passage easier. But when the demands upon us are flying fast and thick, if we know how to work the changes, it might stand us in good stead.