Tuesday, June 5, 2007

The Past

A few weeks ago, I blogged a post by Frank Munkle about a regression he did. Micheal and I had an on going email about it, of which I thought might be interesting to post (with his permission).

He wrote:

The regression story was interesting but I found it a little unsettling
and wondered what your view might be. Admittedly, I'm in the camp that
really does not believe in the whole past life thing but I'm willing to
suspend that and use the concept if a client brings it with them. K's
story of being drowned and eaten by fish pretty much has to be an
invention of her subconscious because in nature, fish are not
experimental gourmands. A sinking human body is an obstacle to avoid,
or a piece of flotsam to ignore, or just maybe a potential predator to
flee from -- anything but lunch. Even the scavengers will tend to stay
away until it sinks to the bottom and is obviously helpless. But if the
image allows K to get past her aversion to fish and makes her happier,
it's harmless. Right?

Or is it? In that same story, we find out, the local official who had K
murdered is now reincarnated as her brother. What does that mean for
K's current relationship with that brother? Is the brother's role in
the story a reflection of an existing problem, or has K now invented a
reason to distance herself from a family member? That's the kind of
thing that worries me about PLR.
My response:

When I took a certification course with NGH, part of it was about regression, of which, yes, I am very interested. It amazes me what the mind can recall when regressed (and I have found a lot of missing car keys, books, and jewelry with it). The interesting thing about this course was that it gave one formula for past life regression, with no regard of giving the participant anything more than a window-shopping experience. It also could very much offend one's sense of beliefs (needing to meet a spirit guide for protection, etc.). I had several clients early on who wanted to experience past life regression, so I would modify the technique, avoiding the spirit guide. The thing is they seemed most unsatisfied. It answered nothing really....and I think those who want it done are looking for a lot more. I say all this because I think a lot hypnotists offer this sort of thing, a window-shopping experience, when the client really has a notion to purchase something.

So, I began reading Brian Weiss and studied with Henry Bolduc, among others. What I learned from them was how to help people connect the dots, find patterns within themselves, and most importantly guided them in realms of acceptance and forgiveness (self and otherwise). It's amazing what this can do.

And yes, this is a long winded answer to your inquiry (perhaps I should post this on the blog?) but I'm not sure exactly what past life regression is...I chose to not take a stance other than it seems a great way for someone to get to know their mind better. Whether it is past life or the mind telling something important about one's self, well, it doesn't seem to matter.

In regards to Frank's story, K may have hit on some fear or idea about the fish nibbling at her and resolved it. Also, I think the idea about her brother being the town official and causing her demise was where forgiveness comes in. Past life regression teaches that you have life lessons to learn and people are with you from life to life so that you may grow (thus they play many roles). A regressionist with no experience other than taking people window shopping might allow for K to destroy her relationship with her brother; a more experience one will guide her to work through it, knowing this is a new life and one cannot move forward by holding onto the negatives. Does this make sense? I'm still on my first cup of coffee.

I can speak for Frank as being a regressionist who does guide people in forgiveness and learning. He is a Unity minister (the relgion that believe in past lives) and has much training in hypnosis, counseling, and regression. Perhaps I should make that clearer? I put it on the blog for such dialog as this (so thank you!) because I do think, if done well, regression can be really useful.


Lee Darrow said...

Regression to a past life, whether "real" or not in the verifiable, historical sense, means little to the client, who comes in the door and believes that this is where their presenting problem stems from.

As a helping professional (so many states don't allow us to use the 'T' word any more), is it better to try to disabuse the client of their hard-held and possibly religious belief, or to work within their model of the universe and use it to help them make the changes that they want to make in their lives?

I know where I stand on this - and that's firmly on the side of the client.

When a client brings me a gift that says "Open Me! I Am The Key To The Issue!" well, it would be rather rude to sau to that client: "Your gift doesn't exist, isn't real and is bad for you," when it isn't.

And, in most cases, a belief in reincarnation isn't particularly damaging. After all, most of the world believes in it and, as we live in a democratic society and the majority is supposed to rule, then reincarnation should be acceptable - at least to the client - so long as it doesn't interfere with the client's ability to function normally (whatever that means!) in day-to-day life and in society-at-large.

So, Darrow's Third Law now states - "Never Look a Gift Past Life In The Mouth!"

Lee "Hey, buddy, can you paradigm?" Darrow, C.H.
(with thanks to my good friend, Murray Porath, Esq. for that last joke)

The Transparent Hypnotist said...

Very nice third law. Well put!

Perhaps you've told me, but what are the first two (just came from a long meeting and my mind is still far off).

Anonymous said...

Your third law makes absolute sense, of course, Lee. It's the way I was trained, and I wholly agree with you on it. The real question here was not whether to use K's past-life belief, but rather *how* to use it. Specifically, what to do about the brother?

As a helping professional, would you try to find out what may have prompted his inclusion in the past-life incident, or would you leave it be? And if the latter, how would you know that you hadn't, quite unintentionally of course, allowed K to create or exacerbate a problem in that relationship?

Therein lies my issue with the original post as written. What's your take on that?

-Michael "Your PUNishment awaits you in the next life" Raugh, C.H. ;^)