"Think I Do" Meme for The Work of Byron Katie Facilitators

Occupy This Facilitator Until Dec. 31, 2011

The tides are changing here in my queendom by the sea. Old systems have been outed as no longer serving, new ones are taking their place amid some inner protesting. Fears of not fitting in or of displeasing others are giving way to the need to live and work with integrity. Call it a midlife crisis; I prefer to call it Occupy Myself...at least 99%.

It has been more than a year, perhaps two, since I last facilitated a workshop, held a teleclass, or trained a trainer. I haven't been diligent about blog posts or newsletters, to say the least. That's because my work as a facilitator of The Work of Byron Katie has largely taken a back seat to some much-needed and long-ignored self-care (exercise and nutrition) and to my creative endeavors: painting, writing and performance. And because, even though I was a promotions manager and copywriter for many years...having done PR for celebrities, created print and web advertising for megacorporations, and composed entire catalogs full of merch...I've never really enjoyed marketing my own stuff.

While I still offer The Work, it has been quite awhile since I've worked hard to build awareness about my services, or to create more curriculum around what is essentially always the same process, wherever it's applied. Truth be told, I've run out of unique things to say about The Work; most of my insights, tips and tricks are right here in this blog, and needn't be endlessly recycled.

I don't see a problem with this turn of events; it's just the way things are. The problem, if there was one, was trying to fit myself into a little box of being a "this" when who I am was always more varied and variable than a "this." There came a point when saying, "This is my life's work" was no longer true; I was playing small and not developing my gifts. In doing so, I was doing a disservice to myself, and perhaps to the world.

So yes, I still facilitate The Work by request, and I still feel without a doubt that it's one of the most elegant processes available to sift through confusion and stuckness to find one's own truth. It certainly has been for me, and continues to be on an as-needed basis. I love staying in The Work by working with others, and, as they say in the 12-step programs, sharing my experience, strength and hope. I am grateful forever for this wonderful way of ours, this way of opening the heavy dungeon doors that, truly speaking, are never locked.

So there is more, much more, to come. I'm excited to let you in on it just as soon as it becomes clearer to me!

Meanwhile, I have had a special rate running for all of 2011, and the year's not over yet. I called it the "Prosperity Special" since I refused to feed the recent recession by calling it that. I have previously made this offer available only to my newsletter subscribers and on the Clear Life Solutions Facebook page, but, as I said, the tides are changing!

So from now until the end of December, you can still experience 12 hour-long sessions of laser-sharp inquiry and unlimited email support for $900, prepaid. (It's okay if the sessions extend into the new year but must be completed by February 2012.) That's a savings of $300 off the price quoted on my website.

Please contact me if you'd like a 20-minute consultation to see if it's appropriate for us to work together.

And why do this with me? Because I'm told that having me as a facilitator is helpful, eye-opening, unorthodox, and a lot of fun. And because it's the lowest rate I've ever offered to the public, and this particular package won't be offered again.

So let's occupy ourselves, 100%.

For more information about who I am and what I've been doing for the past 10 years, please visit ClearLifeSolutions.com

Watch Your Cartoons

A man I’ll call Brad was my nemesis while we worked on a creative project together. He seemed to embody most of my old, stressful “men” stories; a physically imposing, self-important, bossy blowhard used to getting his way. I’d done some inquiry on Brad, but I hadn’t seen a meaningful shift in my feelings about him or in the way I acted around him. I’d slapped a label on him that, while it didn’t accurately list all of his ingredients, was very sticky and difficult to remove.

Truth be told, I didn’t want to let Brad off the hook! But in not doing so, I was keeping myself on the hook. This was especially painful because I really like Brad. He’s a talented, funny, and ultimately very caring person. Still, as I traveled to our meeting place, sometimes I would anticipate conflict and irritate myself in advance, in his name.

One day while doing my inquiry, I realized I was not interacting with Brad, but with a cartoon character of Brad; someone who was always infuriating, never open to others’ ideas. I also saw that if someone else were doing and saying the same things Brad did—someone whose portrait I painted with loving brushstrokes and delicate features instead of outsized characteristics—I might find it amusing, attractive or endearing. (You know how some people are allowed to talk to you through the bathroom door, but when others do, it’s gross? Or how, when your friends walk down the streets singing with their children, it’s funny and sweet, but when you were 10 years old and your parents did it, you wanted to run away and hide?)

I discovered that when I reduced Brad to a cartoon character, I became one as well. Mine looked rather like the little boy in the “Calvin and Hobbes” comic strip, who turns dark and smoldering when he doesn’t get his way, and acts out revenge fantasies on snowmen he builds that resemble his father.

So if Brad is not who I say he is, who is he? Perhaps, rather than a testosterone-soaked bully, he’s a strong person with strong opinions. That isn’t a problem unless I say it is. And I did say so because I saw myself as weak and ineffectual around him…which, as anyone who knows me even a little bit can tell you, is an insane assessment. When I understood this, I was free to see and treat Brad as masterful and proactive—qualities I admire—as opposed to “pushy and full of himself.” He ceased to be a thorn in my side and became a friend and collaborator.

When doing your inquiry—particularly question 3 of The Work, “How do you react when you believe this thought?”—notice how, as you attach to your stressful thoughts, you draw this person with bold strokes and outsized features to prove your point. Are your kids little hurricanes leaving your belongings broken and in disarray, seemingly taking over the entire house? Is your wife, as she’s hunkered over her laptop doing research, really an ice princess, cold and uncaring, who holds the reins of the relationship and never really loved you? What if, while dealing with your parents’ estate, you did not see your brother as the conniving monster who filched your allowance when you were children? Might you be able to communicate with him adult-to-adult today?

Conversely, watch how you, too become a cartoon character when you believe your thoughts about the cartoons. You are the woman whose kids will be the death of you; who does that woman appear to be in that moment? Powerless and harried, or enraged and shouting threats? You are the man whose wife isn’t interested in you. Do you sigh loudly in her presence, rustle the newspaper, slump your shoulders, soothe yourself with whatever’s in the fridge? You’re the trampled baby sister. Are you an ineffectual, broken-down victim, or a snarky little brat? Do you lash out like a wild beast at your cartoon compatriots, or run away like a 90-pound weakling?

When you’re doing The Work on the one you complain about the most…the one who can be counted on to disappoint you…the one who, no matter how prepared you think you are, never fails to trip you up…you can ask yourself, “What if this person isn’t who I say they are?” How would you treat them differently, show up differently with and for them, if you were dealing with a real person and not an exaggerated drawing of the sum total of your criticisms? Watch those crazy characters you’ve created; sit down with a worksheet and enjoy the show.


©2011 by Carol L. Skolnick. All rights reserved.

Turning Around B.S.

In recent months I seem to have developed an extreme intolerance to b.s. In particular, I get uncomfortable around absolutist statements regarding teachings that don't work for me (so I may not be the best person to talk to about Satan, contacting your angel guides, or the wit and wisdom of Sarah Palin)...or those that trigger "cult" memories (such as the words "impure" and "negativity," terms used to keep us devotees in line at the ashram), or stuff from my own mentors that seems downright incorrect in my experience (just because you-know-who says "All sadness is a minor tantrum" doesn't make it true)...and, last but not least, by my own attempts to b.s. others by hiding behind insincerity, spiritual talk, quotable quotes and smiley chat icons like this one :).

I think it's fine to notice b.s., and it's more than fine to endeavor to keep my own tendencies to b.s. in check. What doesn't feel fine is my reactivity to b.s., or, more accurately, what I label as "b.s." I haven't spent all this time in inquiry for nothing: my objections do not make me happy. I don't really enjoy being the Geraldo Rivera of horse hockey, exposing it with derision or horror while offering nothing better in return. Even if I do have something else to offer, I'd rather do it without vilifying that with which I don't agree.

So here's an experiment I am trying and invite you to it if you like it:

1) Rather than cry "B.S!" I would like to be able to 1) politely disagree and 2) offer kind alternatives. I say "alternatives" as opposed to "substitutes," as perhaps the original needs no substitute. We're all entitled to espouse what works for us. I can choose and offer my own alternatives without making the your alternative wrong.


Example: A single friend sent me an email about how women can cultivate successful romantic relationships with men. It had a line that was right out of that old book, The Rules (the one that advises women to play hard to get, not be so available, and not to do things for men). I had a strong reaction to it and resisted the urge to write back to my friend that this was the "old way" and manipulative, that there was nothing in this email about real relationship. Instead, I didn't respond, writing it off as b.s. Now that I look back, I could have had a conversation with my friend, asked her why she felt this email contained good advice, shared my heart and my experience, heard from her why this doesn't work for her. Instead of the rift between us that I created in my head, maybe we both would have learned something.


2) Rather than simply call myself on my own b.s., I would like to be aware of the motives behind it. What would I have to believe in order to say anything that is less than 100% genuine? What am I trying to protect, project or avoid? What is the worst that could happen if I were truthful instead? Voila, here is my work to take to inquiry.

Example: I write on a Facebook friend's wall post, "I don't get this at all. :)." What's the :) about? "You can hurt me, if I disagree with you, you won't like me, I need to placate people, it's not okay to disagree." All good beliefs to bring to inquiry.


3) "This is b.s.; is that true?" When I cry b.s., it is probably because I feel challenged, threatened or offended. In short, I am afraid. Can I find any truth in what I am so quick to label as b.s.?

For instance: "If you do not see the perfection of this spiritual path, it is your own impurities keeping you from the truth. You should pray for the grace to develop good qualities and turn away from negativity." This is the kind of thing that puts fur on my teeth. Why? Not merely because I don't believe it—there are plenty of things I don't believe in that don't bother me—but because for many years, I used such teachings as a stick with which to beat myself. "I'm impure! I'm negative! Negativity is bad! I am keeping myself from the truth, and that means I will never be okay!" I didn't have inquiry in those days.

Today, with better tools in hand, I don't need to put the stick in my other hand and beat the teachers or teachings. Instead, I can ask myself, "I am impure; is that true?" and "They manipulated me with these teachings; is that true?"

A closer look reveals this: if I react to these words through the filter of my prejudices, I have to call them b.s. in order to be right and feel safe. If the prejudices aren't there, I see that there is some truth here; I don't see the perfection of this spiritual path when I don't see that it is fine for it to exist, and that doesn't mean I have to partake of it. My impurities—in the form of fear, which leads to defensiveness—keep me from the truth (that this path, whether or not I choose to follow it, is perfect in that it exists in a world that is perfect until I say it isn't). If I prayed, I would pray for the grace of an open mind, which is my way of developing good qualities of equanimity and clarity in the face of what is. An open mind can have preferences without naysaying; and that is the end of negativity.

Who would have believed it? B.s. is here for our freedom!

©2011 by Carol L. Skolnick. All rights reserved.

Ask A Facilitator: Won't I Be a Doormat?

Q: If I answer Question 4, "Who would I be without that thought?" it's just speculation. In reality, I'd be an idiot without my thoughts, ignoring the facts and with no protection. Can't I just skip to the turnarounds?

A: Yes it's speculative; question 4 of The Work of Byron Katie is meant to open the mind to possibilities other than the one we've been believing. It's not about ignoring facts, or even about changing from one thought to another.

In my experience, without the "education" of my answers to the four questions, the turnarounds can leave me feeling incomplete. It's too easy for me to go to default, making my turnarounds into affirmations (which tend not to work for me) or sticks with which to beat myself (which, though habitual, really really really don't work for me).

I'm not the most "positive" person on earth, as my readers and friends may have noticed. I doubt, I distrust, I fear something bad will happen if I'm not vigilant. So for me, question 4 is a stretch, and it's meant to be. I, too, want to say, "I'd be a fool, I'd be a patsy, I'd be a doormat."

When the mind comes up with those quick answers, I have learned to be patient, to say, "That could be; and is there anything else? What if this stressful thought did not run my life? How would I show up, facts in hand, without living out of this belief and all the repercussions of doing so that I have seen in Question 3?"

That allows me to see myself in any situation as loving, present, self-posessed. And then I can at believe my "positive" turnarounds without myself to task over the "negative" ones.

Example:

Let's say I have done The Work on "He verbally abused me." Let's say my answer to questions 1 and 2 are "Yes, it is true. I can absolutely know that it's true." (I don't have to get cosmic and say, "Oh, he called me names and said things that I experienced as shaming and blaming, but that was only my interpretation." If I'm doing The Work on this when the issue is still "hot," I'm not in that space; I would never tell anyone else that they had brought their abuse on themselves.)

So, briefly, when I live out of the belief (which is different, for me, than believing it: you can acknowledge that something happened and not base your every waking moment on it), I am seeing just one part of our relationship. I take the moments where he said and did this, this and this and that becomes the entire relationship, in my mind. I hate him, I see him as sadistic, I blame him for my unhappiness, I worry that he's right; my self-esteem plummets. I overeat to ease the pain. I complain about him to others. I fight back with my own sharp tongue, an eye for an eye. I manipulate him with my body. I project a loveless future for myself. I want him to suffer. I want him to understand that he damaged me. I am damaged goods.

Who would I be without this thought? (Here's where the voice kicks in that says I'd be Cleopatra the Queen of Denial, an idiot, a battered woman who is victimized by the big bad man, etc.) I would see that ending the relationship equals sanity and I need not do it with drama and recrimination. I would see him as doing the best he can when he is obviously in pain, and this does not mean I stay with him. I would notice that I still care for him and am still attracted to him, and this does not mean that I stay with him. I notice that I care about myself enough to stop hurting myself in his name. I don't make all men out to be abusers. I cherish the wonderful connection we had and don't diminish that.

Now I can experience my turnarounds (He did not verbally abuse me. I verbally abused myself. I verbally abused him. He verbally nurtured me) with clarity. They are all true to varying degrees, and I was not wrong to believe my original statement; I'm not insane.


©2010 by Carol L. Skolnick. All rights reserved. The Work of Byron Katie, ©Byron Katie International, used with permission.

In the Name of The Work, How Do I Abandon The Work?

Byron Katie has said, "If I think you need The Work, I need The Work."

I'll take it one step further: outside of a mutually agreed-upon, facilitator-client relationship, in the moment I invite you to question your thoughts, I have left The Work; it has become something else entirely.

What do I mean by this? Discuss.

"Dangerous" Turnarounds and the Power of "Sometimes"

Here are some dangerous thoughts; dangerous for us who believe them, because we may stake our very lives on them and create unnecessary stress, suffering and separation.



-I am right.


-My way is the right way.


-I know what's best for you.


When we do The Work on these thoughts we may come upon these turnarounds (among others):


-You are right. (Or) I am wrong.


-My way is the wrong way.


-You know what's best for me.


Notice if you are swapping one funky thought for another! These thoughts, while they could be as true or truer than the original statements, are equally dangerous if we make them into our new religion.

The purpose of inquiry is not to make yourself wrong and another right. It's not to make another into an all-knowing Messiah. Turnarounds need not be sticks with which we beat ourselves, and they're not meant to cancel out our beliefs.

It's important to keep a sense of balance when doing The Work, to remember that the purpose of inquiry is clarity, and the result of turnarounds is balance. One way to do that is to incorporate the word "sometimes" in your turnarounds.

Examine how things can be as true or truer "sometimes."

-(Sometimes) you are right. (Also) I am wrong, sometimes.
-My way is the wrong way, sometimes.
-(Sometimes) you know what's best for me.

When you add "sometimes" to your turnarounds, it may be easier to find specific, genuine (not automatic, not spiritual) examples. For example, "sometimes" you know what's best for me when you have more information than I do. (My chiropractor knows it's not good for me to do certain exercises because he knows the condition of my spine. You know what's best for me, sometimes, when you give me unasked for advice that I don't take because I'm standing on ceremony. Sometimes you know what's best for me when you tell me something I don't want to hear; it brings up all my stuff about you that I haven't brought to inquiry.)

Another way to work with tricky turnarounds:  add phrases like "when you do." "If you do." "When I do." "When it is.) "If I do." "In this moment." Examples:

"My way is the wrong way (in this moment when I see myself as knowing what's best for you)."

"You know what's best for me (when you do, such as in when you defy me and I need that "medicine")."


©2010 by Carol L. Skolnick. All rights reserved.

Whose Identity Is This, Anyway?

The day after Santa Cruz Pride Weekend, I stopped to look at the colorful posters in the window of the Diversity Center, our local GBLT support organization, to see if there were any fun concerts or activities I might like to attend. I noticed a moment's hesitation when a woman came out of the center and gave me a cheerful hello. This really disturbed me. A part of me still felt I shouldn't be there.

There was a time in my life when I would have felt too uncomfortable to smile and say hi back to her, when the hesitation would not have been momentary but total. At that time I would never have stopped to read the posters in the window in case anyone I knew (or anyone I didn't know) might think I had a vested interest in gayness. Even though I lived in Greenwich Village for many years—the former heart of gay life in the city—and even though I had gay, bi and lesbian friends and attended Pride Weekend activities with them, I always made sure to wear my "Straight But Not Narrow" button, just in case anyone had any ideas. Since none of my straight friends ever went to watch the parade—they tended to avoid downtown altogether—I thought I was extremely open-minded; I had no idea how homophobic I was. Years later, when I became friendly with a trans-man, I had yet another entire set of misconceptions and fears to question and work through.

Now that I (mostly) know that others' sexuality and gender identification are none of my business, I continued to stand in front of the Diversity Center, read the posters, smile and say hi to the woman who came out of the center, and I thought, perhaps "my" gender and sexuality are none of my business either. They are not "mine."

No one can help loving someone else in the way that we do. (And why would we want to help it? It doesn't need our help!) No one does anything to come into this world with the genes and organs we have. How can I take credit for this? How can I even label myself one thing or another?

I understand the thinking behind Gay Pride; pride being the opposite of shame, it makes perfect sense to celebrate what society has long deemed shameful, and always with disastrous results. Of course, straight people can be ashamed of their sexuality as well. As a pre-teen, I was simply horrified by mine; my desire for boys seemed huge and overwhelming, totally wrong for someone my age to be carrying around. Then there was that O.A. meeting I attended once at the Gay and Lesbian center in Manhattan, where I felt I would be hanged at sundown if anyone knew a "breeder" had infiltrated their safe haven. It seems so funny now. Why didn't I celebrate those wonderful people—and myself—for gathering in support and fellowship?

It occurs to me that if I'm ashamed of my sexuality, just as if I am ashamed of my body, I'm confused. And also if I'm proud of it, I'm confused. Once again, I'm identifying with something that doesn't belong to me and, like everything else, is subject to change without notice.


©2010 by Carol L. Skolnick. All rights reserved.

Focus on Facilitation: I Heart "Difficult" Clients!

Recently I worked with someone who yeahbutted, becaused, justified, defended, and told stories for the better part of three sessions. This isn't unusual and I handled it the way I usually do; I listened for awhile, then pointed out what was happening and led her back to the questions...which pissed her off. That's also not unusual; and that's okay with me, I'm not doing this job in order to make friends, and I make that clear with every "difficult" client I encounter, while making sure they are okay with getting back to the process of inquiry.

During the last of our three sessions, something sunk in, the client said said, that hadn't budged for her after years of therapy on the same issue she was trying to dodge as she worked on it with me. So she signed up for more sessions.

If every client were "easy," I would not have the privilege of witnessing how most everyone who opts to sit in the client "hot seat" thirsts for resolution and eventually finds it. Sometimes they don't, or they don't just yet; and that is business of mine. When the time is right, there is simply nothing we, as clients, can do about breaking through. When it's not time, there is simply nothing that we, as facilitators, can do about that either. There's no magic formula, there are no right words to say. That's why it's great to tap into our own difficult-ness, so we can meet them where they are, where we are. Have you ever been resistant, cranky, closed, convinced you're right? I sure have. Five minutes ago. Five minutes from now.

I was a difficult client amundo o-rama. Just ask Byron Katie; she fondly remembers me fighting with her, in my fiery red dress. Then she got to watch while my world melted away before our eyes, not a moment before it was supposed to. Too bad my two times in the chair with her and my time at my first school weren't recorded so you could all see how adorable I am when I'm insane. (Friends of mine know that I'm still difficult!) And how helpless I was as sanity slowly came to light.

Nobody needs The Work, not if they don't want it. And if a "difficult" client is sitting with me, I have to assume they want it. I'm not going to give up on them, try to change their minds, spout canned wisdom at them. I'm not going to pounce on them the second I hear them say the letter "b" (as in "but" and "because"). This isn't a game of "gotcha."

Instead, I'm going to hear them and let them hear themselves. (So many juicy core beliefs come to light when a client justifies, defends and gives backstory; why wouldn't we want that?) Then I'm going to give them whatever I have, which isn't much. That's what was given to me: not much; and of course, that "not much" was more than enough. That's why I'm still here to tell the tale.

In my experience, the "difficult" clients are working harder than anyone else I work with. They are scared to lose their stories; and yet, they want to. The story is half gone already and they are holding on to its remnants for dear life, knowing they are about to lose the old religion for good.

Maybe the bigger we are, the harder we fall.

I love my "difficult" clients! Yeah, I play favorites; because (oh no, justification!) they are me, they are my heart, they are my work. And "difficult" is a story I used to use to torture myself in their name.

I hope, for your sake, that you don't still believe in "difficult" clients.


©2010 by Carol L. Skolnick. All rights reserved.

The Arrogance of Not Knowing

At a certain point in your inquiry practice, you will undoubtedly come to recognize the arrogance behind the words "I know." However, the opposite stance can be just as arrogant: "I can't know anything! (And its mostly unspoken implication, "Therefore you can't know anything either.")

In this way, "I don't know" becomes as much of a religion as "I know." This is pure dogma and has little if anything to do with the process of inquiry or any real understanding that comes of it.

There can be great freedom in realizing that there isn't too much we can know for sure, particularly when it comes to stressful, limiting assumptions we have made all of our lives. It's when we want to impose I-Don't-Knowism on the rest of the world that it becomes yet another prison...and a very oppressive one at that.

Proselytizers from The Holy Church of I-Don't-Know may come across in the following ways—but only for our highest good, of course. Is this you? (It's been me at times, for sure!):


1. Facilitating others when they haven't asked for it.

Human Being with Human Reactions: I have a headache.

Devotee of I-Don't-Knowism: Is that true?

Human Being: Yes, it's true. My head is pounding. I shouldn't have had beer and pizza last night.

Devotee: Oh really? "You shouldn't have had beer and pizza." I would soooo question that. Does that belief bring peace or stress into your life?


2. Nondual One-upmanship.

Human Being: Wow, I just heard on the news that 108,000,000 people died in Squatslavia today when a 12.0 earthquake, a tsunami, and wildfires demolished the entire country.

Devotee: I don't see a problem. Could it be that this is for their highest good? I can't know what's best for the Squatslavians. Or for the world. Or even for myself. How do I know the world is supposed to self-destruct? It's self-destructing; that's reality.


3. Being non-committal in the name of enlightenment.

Human Being: Will you marry me?

Devotee: In this moment it's a "yes," and "mind" might change itself. I love you with all my heart, and I can't know how I'm going to feel five minutes from now, and either way, it's not personal. So it would be out of my integrity to say yes. Or no.

Human Being: Well, I don't know what to do now. Do we make plans for our wedding, or what?

Devotee: (Insert favorite Ramana Maharshi-ish or Nisargadatta-esque "we are not the doers" statement here.)


If you think I am exaggerating, you haven't hung out on social media recently. Sometimes people are sort-of kidding (you can tell if they put a little smiley face next to what they wrote) but often this is in all seriousness. Not surprisingly, the "conversion" rate is not terrifically high and no wonder; there's no meeting people where they are in this kind of "communication."

At the end of her workshops, Byron Katie often says, "Want to alienate your friends and family? Talk to them like this: [Putting on an obnoxious voice:] 'Is that truuuue? Turn it aroooouuuund!'"

This always gets a big laugh, Then darned if many of us don't go home and do it! (Been there, done that, and I apologize! Ugh!!!)

In contrast, those who live out of their realizations and don't teach/preach frequently are asked by those who knew them "when," "You seem terrific, what are you doing these days? Did you fall in love or something?"

If you can answer that with a simple "yes" or "no," then sign me up.


©2010 by Carol L. Skolnick. All rights reserved.

Helping Others While Helping Yourself

Ironically, some the very things we have come to view as expensive luxuries are the ones that help us to take good care of ourselves.

Like many friends and colleagues all over the world, I have been feeling the pinch of the economy in recent years. So it feels funny to expect everyone to find a way to pay my old fee structure, set during more prosperous times, when I myself can't regularly afford many of the things that help me to prosper and grow in my life, whether it's a workshop, a massage, coaching sessions or even health care.

Believe it or not, marketing gurus to the self-employed advise raising fees in a recession! I've never grokked the logic of this advice and it has never sat well with me; it dismisses the experience of the people I most desire to serve, who don't need one more stressor, like higher prices, on their plates.

If you've wanted to do ongoing inquiry with a facilitator but simply could not justify the expense, you'll be happy to hear about my new (and unpublished on my website) Transformational Inquiry Prosperity Package, available now through the end of 2010 only to my friends, clients and subscribers: 10 pre-paid one-hour sessions of The Work for $750. That's only $150 more than the already discounted six-session package advertised at ClearLifeSolutions.com...and, at just $75 per session, it's my lowest publicly offered fee in eight years.

In addition, I will donate $10 of each package fee either to Partners In Health--the relief organization that has been active in Haiti for 20 years and has the infrastructure in place to help victims of the earthquake--or Groundworks Opportunities, which has been instrumental in helping Rwandans come to grips with the past and rebuild their lives, from building houses to learning The Work. You choose which group you'd like to see prosper from your Work. (If you prefer that the donation go to a local charity, I can arrange that as well.)

To enroll in the Prosperity Package (I can't bring myself to call it a recession special!), I only require that you...

*Prepay for all 10 sessions.
*Complete all 10 sessions in three months' time (ideally one session per week; and of course you can do it more frequently).
*Be an active subscriber to the infrequent, fun and informative Transformational Inquiry newsletter; if you aren't already on my mailing list, sign up at http://www.clearlifesolutions.com/newsletter.htm (You'll also receive a complimentary white paper, The Nine Proficiencies of The Work at Work.)

Please note I cannot accept Paypal payments with this offer.

Active subscribers to Transformational Inquiry, please contact me here: http://www.clearlifesolutions.com/contactcarol.htm

Ask a Facilitator Anything!

How Much Time Should I Take for The Work?

Q: How often do you suggest someone do The Work? It takes me about 12-20 minutes to question one belief out of maybe 20-30 beliefs on the Judge-Your-Neighbor Worksheet.

A: How much time would you put aside for a daily meditation practice, or for exercise? I see doing The Work as very similar to doing these other things; you don't want to exhaust yourself, but the more regularly you work at inquiry, the more "muscle" you'll develop.

That said, I think the amount of time you set aside isn't as important as making space for it in your day. If you're new to inquiry, you might want to do it every day at first. Twenty minutes could be long enough; an hour is great if you find it's helping you to sit with the questions longer. In session with a client, we work for an hour, sometimes an hour and a half. The important thing is to routinely question your stressful beliefs so that you begin to experience the effects of inquiry when you are not actively doing it.

When I was learning how to do The Work, I used to spend a couple of hours every day...but that's because I was in a big hurry to fix myself! I soon burnt myself out (and also I came to see that The Work is not a "fix," it's a way to develop and expand awareness). Later on, I spent maybe 20 or 30 minutes a day doing actual writing, then it became a few times a week or less, or as needed. The mechanism of inquiry was alive in me by that time so I didn't always have to write everything down. When I found myself letting myself take shortcuts, I went back to writing.

From time to time I go back to doing The Work every day, but mostly I use it when I feel confused or upset with no relief, or when I am particularly curious about why someone or something is troubling me, or when a stressful concept I thought I was done with feels sticky once again. If I have a worksheet with a lot of thoughts I want to look at, I might spread it out over several days.

Everyone is different and you may find you want to spend more or less time in inquiry than others.


Can't I Have Wants and Needs?

Q: I just started reading Katie's books and I'm wondering what happens when someone truly is dissatisfied with their situation and wants to leave. When is it appropriate to have boundaries? Or is it just about finding peace in whatever situation you're in and accepting people for who they are? Can't I have wants and needs? For example, I accept my husband for not being expressive and demonstrative; does that mean I shouldn't want to leave him? If he doesn't put any time into the relationship, should I just accept that?


A: If I know I need to leave a situation, I leave it! The key word here is "know." Accepting and finding peace in a challenging relationship does not mean you have to stay there. And I will ask myself: can I know I need to leave, or am I really wanting to stay while (hopelessly) hoping my partner will change?

I'm all for having needs and wants and for being very clear about what they are. If I want someone to fulfill those needs and wants for me, that's a recipe for disappointment and resentment. If I want a demonstrative, expressive partner, for example, and my partner is not demonstrative and expressive, whether I stay or go depends on how badly I truly want that and whether I'd rather be with him than not.

Is it true that you accept your husband? Here's where acceptance comes from: question beliefs like, "My husband should be expressive" and "He doesn't put any time into the relationship." Doing so puts you back in touch with what's true for you. Acceptance is acceptance of the truth; acceptance doesn't mean you shortchange yourself.

If you know it's time to leave, what stressful thoughts keep you from doing so? (Fears, "shoulds," etc.) If you know you want to stay, what stressful thoughts keep you from loving your relationship? (Write a worksheet on your husband and find out!)


Never A Reason to Break Up?

Q: It seems there would never be a reason to break up with a partner, because if we do The Work, we would find a turnaround for every criticism pointing back to ourselves. What am I not getting/seeing here?

A: There could be many reasons to break up with a partner, including simply knowing that it's time to go. Relationships run their course. We change our minds. Our lives and our priorities change. We don't have to vilify the other person in order to leave them...and we don't have to stay just because we've discovered our criticisms of them could easily be directed at ourselves.

Why do you walk down one street rather than another one? Does it have to mean that one street is better than the other street? Maybe you're in a hurry today and it takes a little less time to walk down the street you are choosing, or there's a lovely tree there that you like to look at, or you simply enjoy a change of scene. You're not a terrible person for having preferences! There's a street I avoid because it is hilly and when I come back from the store carrying packages, I prefer not to climb uphill. I don't say "This street is too hilly, turn it around: I am too hilly. Uh oh, I'd better keep walking on the hilly street because otherwise it means I don't love what is!"

When we do turnarounds in The Work, it's not meant to talk us into or out of anything; it's simply a way to expand awareness. I can't emphasize this point enough: turnarounds show us peaceful alternatives that we may not have seen. They point to what else could be as true or truer in this vast universe of choices. They show us where we have been mistaken, where we might want to loosen our grip, create more freedom in our lives, heal ourselves and make amends to those we might have hurt.

If, when judging your partner, you have a "negative" turnaround to yourself—for example, "He's inconsiderate." "I'm inconsiderate."—it doesn't mean you have to stay with him because you've been inconsiderate. This turnaround is pointing to, "Where have I been inconsiderate of him?" Perhaps by wanting him to change for your sake...and maybe he can't do that. It could be that this is a wonderful man who is not your wonderful man; you've been confused about that. Now you can do right by him and stop the violence (to yourself as well as to him) of wishing he were different.

If you stay, questioning your thoughts will help you stay with love, including self-love. If you go, it could be the most loving thing you can do...without resentment or blame.

At first I wanted to stop seeing a man I was dating because HE did this and HE did (or didn't do) that. My friends were saying, "Oh, you've got to end it, HE's a this, HE's a that, you deserve much better. (Friends just love to take our side when we're going through relationship stuff, as if there were an enemy against whom we need defending.) While I appreciated their support, seeing the man as a dastardly fiend didn't actually make me feel better, nor did it make it any easier for me to tell him I was done.

I got clear that what was going on between us was mostly going on between my ears; old beliefs that prevented me from letting myself know what I knew, that pulled me out of my own integrity. The "negative" turnarounds, such as "he lied to me"/"I lied to him"/"I lied to myself" rang very true and they did not feel like I was whipping myself. When I finally told him it wasn't working out for me, never implying that he (or I) did anything wrong or that he wasn't good enough for me, he said he had never been "dumped" so nicely before and hoped we would stay friends. I feel closer to him now than when I was trying to "accept" him.


©2010 by Carol L. Skolnick. All rights reserved.

A Happy New Year Within Reach

Dear Friends,

In honor of this holiday season, I want to share with you some words that touched me today from, of all things, a website advertising a recovery event in the UK where Byron Katie will be the keynote speaker.

Regarding breaking free from addictions, the author of the piece, George Williams, says:

"People try many things to fill that empty space in their lives, whether they are searching for happiness or a way to deal with pressures and disappointments....Sometimes we have to look back to move forward. Learn from our mistakes or shortfalls. For those taking those first steps, don’t be afraid, you have all the resources within.

"Imagine having the courage and confidence to follow your instincts and make positive decisions about how you want to live your life."

As I read this I was reminded of the following words from the "Big Book" of Alcoholics Anonymous, a great source of wisdom for coping with all of the addictions of being human:

"When I am disturbed, it is because I find some person, place, thing or situation—some fact of my life—unacceptable to me, and I can find no serenity until I accept that person, place, thing or situation as being exactly the way it is supposed to be at this moment."

We humans tend towards all sorts of addictions—whether to substances, behaviors, or outdated modes of thinking—in an effort to feel better about ourselves and our lives. We want people to change, to love us, to appreciate us, so that we can be happy. "Skip the middleman," Byron Katie has said, "and be happy now." That is the only thing that has ever worked, and there is no way to do that on demand. We can't enforce serenity; we all would if we could. It takes self-understanding, present-moment awareness and great willingness.

Serenity is an inside job. Self-inquiry—whether you practice the written four-questions-and-a-turnaround kind that we "Workies" prefer, or you sit in the mystery of "Who am I?", or you take fearless moral inventory and make your amends-is the best way I know of to bring about the serenity that we all desire and deserve. We are living in interesting times; what is happening on the outside feels challenging and sometimes hopeless—from rampant unemployment to global warming. Some of us have experienced eroding relationships, deaths in the family, the death of our dreams. We can work to bring about positive change in the world, to better ourselves and our situations...but how are we doing in the meantime? Addictive highs always wear off and we become consumed by seeking more escapes when the ones we've tried cease to work. Trying to please others, change them, even "forgive" them may not result in lasting serenity.

In my experience, peace can only be found by meeting the stressed-out mind with a kind mind, an understanding mind; a mind at rest. In this way, instead of running away from what we fear, we move towards what we love and cherish. I invite us all to give ourselves this kindness in the New Year.

May all of your days be holidays and all of your years be happy, new ones.

With love,
Carol

What's So Bad About Negativity?

For years I was involved in a group whose adherents felt very threatened by any view of it that seemed to contradict what it was desperately trying to be: the "perfect" spiritual path. Any opinion (and the one who voiced the opinion) that could be perceived as "negative" with regards to the group was immediately attacked and blocked. You see, on a perfect path, the leader and those in high places in the organization could never make a mistake; were always doing what they did for our highest good; had no ulterior motives; were beyond reproach. If, and only if, you were a good devotee, had full faith and did everything you were told, you'd attract the all-knowing, unconditionally loving guru's grace (which, on the perfect path, you already have unless you do something to repel it), you would become self-realized (though as a good devotee, you could never acknowledge this as it smacks of dreaded "ego") and you'd have your heaven on earth.

If you doubted any of this—if, say, you dared to notice any inconsistencies, or refused to go against personal integrity...if you had questions about the teachings...or you had a problem with underage girls being used sexually by older men in power, or with goods being smuggled in and out of other countries...or with celebrities receiving V.I.P. treatment in a place where we were all told we were equal...or with blatant environmental violations, or with the presence of weapons and bodyguards in an ashram, or with "renunciants" sporting designer clothing and precious jewels—then you were deluded, had limited understanding, had fallen off the path, etc.

Oh the horror and danger of exposure to anything but positivity! Most of us suppressed or denied anything within ourselves that could be construed as anything less than 100% cheerful and agreeable. Needless to say, a lot of the devotees were secretly in therapy and taking anti-depressants...and doing more and more spiritual practices in an attempt to override our perceived impurities.

After many years and many experiences of being chastised for being "negative," I realized something: if our organization, its leaders and its teachings were sacred and sacrosanct, what could threaten them? And yet, there was a pervasive atmosphere of self-righteousness and unkindness which, beneath the surface, was pure, unadulterated fear. It seemed that what was going on in the organization was the exact opposite of one of the main teachings: that love was stronger than fear. Where was the love when all was not handled in an open and loving fashion?

Of course, religious organizations are not the only places where the fear of negativity reigns. Ashrams, like everywhere else, are filled with human beings; and human beings who have not questioned their stressful beliefs attack whatever appears to threaten their happiness (as if true happiness could be threatened). So we try to create safe havens for ourselves where sharing is welcome as long as what is shared aligns with the basic premise of our subculture. If anyone might burst our bubbles, indicate we could be wrong, or cost us our precious stuff, we tend not to welcome them with great respect and love. Places of business, family gatherings, groups of friends or neighbors and political parties are just a few of the places where individuals might not be embraced or even acknowledged—in fact might be shunned, shamed and shut up, even if we have to kill them—if they're not seeing our world through our particular brand of rose-colored glasses.

In the best-case scenarios, we close rank, turn off the TV, stop answering the phone, defriend our Facebook buddies who don't see things exactly as we do, avoid people or situations that might result in being "tainted" by another's "negativity." We have to call those people and things toxic, wrong, bad. We double up on our affirmations, surround ourselves in imaginary white light, run away.

That might work as a temporary measure. Until the bogeyman shows up at the door again. Or you think back on the person who threatened the sacrosanct belief that turned out not to be sacrosanct after all (at least not according to you), and you feel the fear all over again in the form of condescension, resentment, anger, sadness, disgust, stress, disturbance of your peace.

If you fear the "negative," it will appear to come a-calling for you in many guises: "negative" people, situations, thoughts. A loving universe won't let you get away with avoidance. It supports you instead.

What's the worst thing that could happen if you welcomed the "negative," sat down to tea with it, questioned it?


©2009 by Carol L. Skolnick. All rights reserved.

"So Don't Do That!"

There's an old Henny Youngman joke that I love: "I said to my doctor, it hurts when I do that [he lifts his arm]; he told me 'So don't do that!'"

As a facilitator, my "Don't do that!" for people who do self-inquiry is, "Don't use The Work as a way to beat yourself or others."

Here's an example; a quote from Byron Katie that gets misinterpreted, in my not-so-humble opinion:

"If I see an enemy, I need to take another look because that is my friend, not my enemy. Enemies enlighten me to myself; that makes them friends."

Some use this teaching as a way to make themselves wrong, bad and delusional if they aren't always open to or in agreement with another's criticism or if they can't shrug off slights or abuse with "it's all good." Please don't do that. Self-flagellation is not inquiry. Offering yourself up as a human sacrifice is not inquiry. Do your work, find ways that turnarounds can be as true or truer but not "instead of"—include everything. Finding your part in a situation is not making yourself wrong. It doesn't mean that you become a doormat. It means that you have ceased to be a victim of black-and-white thinking. And just because your enemies are your "friends" doesn't mean that you have to live with them, do business with them, never take legal action or stop locking your front door.

Others use this teaching as an excuse to behave badly. "It can never be my fault that you're upset. You're just angry because you didn't get what you want. I'm free, you're the one with the problem." Please don't do that either; it's using The Work as a shield and a weapon rather than a tool with which to discover your own truth. This is not inquiry, it's new age bull-dinky. Again, do your work, find your part, enlighten yourself. Fear of being wrong or of being blamed is natural...and it also comes from collusion. If they say you're wrong and bad, and it hurts, they're right...but only according to you.

So don't do that!


©2009 by Carol L. Skolnick. All rights reserved.

Why Do We Blame Victims?

You hear it in New Age circles, therapy groups and arguments between "friends" (I've done it myself) all the time: "Stop being such a victim!"

This stance smacks of a current, odious trend of faulty reasoning: if something bad happens to you, "you must have attracted it."

Why has victim-bashing become so fashionable? It may be due to a misinterpretation of karma, the spiritual law of cause and effect. A simple example of karma: if you stick your hand in a fire, you're going to have a burnt hand; if you break the law and you go to jail it was your own doing; you may be happier for continually helping little old ladies and blind men to cross the street than if you ignore them or run them over with your car.

The more complicated way to see karma—and a convenient way to blame victims—is to say, "If you fell into the fire and got burned, you probably did something to deserve it." According to this theory, your thinning hair, your low-paying job, your inability to find a life partner, the fact that you were raped, or your having being born with HIV in a rat-infested third-world prison is your fault. You have no right to complain! Find your part in your pain and unhappiness and move on! There's not even a remote possibility that life isn't always a bowl of cherries except for you screwing things up for yourself.

Why are we "spiritual" and "personal growth" types so intensely down on victimhood? Whatever happened to "we're all one and it's all good?"

I think it's because victims make us afraid. We fear them because we fear our own inadequacies.

Let's first look at the dictionary definition of "victim."

VICTIM (Noun)
1. One who is harmed or killed by another: a victim of a mugging.
2. A living creature slain and offered as a sacrifice during a religious rite.
3. One who is harmed by or made to suffer from an act, circumstance, agency, or condition: victims of war.
4. A person who suffers injury, loss, or death as a result of a voluntary undertaking: You are a victim of your own scheming.
5. A person who is tricked, swindled, or taken advantage of: the victim of a cruel hoax.

No one can sanely deny that the blameless kinds of victims exist (definitions 1-3 and 5). What seems to make us so uncomfortable is not victims of disaster (we feel great about people like that because we can play superhero and help them) but the "victim mentality," the assumption that because something terrible has happened, that things will always be terrible. Those who we call victims appear to live out of fearful stories of the past. "I just lost my home to a hurricane" = acceptable victim. "I lost my home to a hurricane, my wife left me, my child is sick, I have no money and I can't get a job" = somewhat more difficult to deal with victim. "I've tried everything and my luck has run out" = VSM (Very Scary Victim).

VSMs bring out many unquestioned assumptions and fears in the suddenly ineffective, thwarted hero, such as:

"They want something from me."
"They are blaming me."
"I have to make it better for them."
"They're not doing enough to better themselves."
"They should be more positive."
"They pretend to be weak."
"They brought it upon themselves."

Barbara Ehrenreich has recently written a book about the cult of positivity. Curmudgeon though she may be, I think there's a lot of truth in what she says. Some of us don't pursue happiness for the joy of it but as a way to avoid pain. There is nothing wrong with that as long as a) you know what you're doing and b) you don't disdain another's (perhaps more realistic) path.

If your life is going great, or if you yourself have overcome great obstacles and found some measure of hope, you may find it hard to believe that this may not be available to everyone. If you feel your own happiness is on shaky ground, it may be especially hard to be around someone who is often fearful, angry or feels hopeless. We don't want them messing with our vibe. We don't want to see that, at any moment, we too could come down from our self-realized high. We don't want to acknowledge any family resemblance.

There's a Byron Katie quote that's become a big favorite among those who who are uncomfortable with others' unhappiness: "Victims are violent people." It's important to understand the spirit of this quote: it was never meant to blame the victim. Katie says this when she sees people lashing out at themselves or others...not to tell them not to do that, but to provide insight that may lead to a lessening of suffering. It's true that we are sometimes violent in the name of "violence was done to me." That's the nature of war.

When we inquire into our stressful thoughts about our own victimhood, we see where we have been overly harsh with our victimizers, with ourselves, with those we perceive are not helping us enough or at all. This is the first step in getting free of suffering. It's not something to prescribe to VSMs and even if they take the suggestion, it doesn't mean that these perceived victims will suddenly rise and shine and prove your spiritual theories of unlimited abundance to be correct, that they'll get happier so that you can feel better around them, or that they'll never ask you for anything that you don't feel like giving them again.

So that leaves us, the ones afraid of the VSMs, to do more of our inner work. Someone should stop being such a victim—why? Can you know what is best for them in the long run? If they did what you wanted, what would you have that you don't have now?

When you complain about someone being a victim, what are you reacting to...the victim, or your fear of being...victimized by them?

Could it be that the Very Scary Victims, like others we fear or resent, are here just for us, to take us ever closer to Home Sweet Home?


©2009 by Carol L. Skolnick. All rights reserved.

Why We Believe, Part 4: The "Dr. Phil" Question

Sometimes we just love our beliefs because we are convinced they are working for us, evidence to the contrary. Let's look once again at the belief, "My husband shouldn't have affairs." The client says that if she didn't believe this thought, it would be akin to condoning her husband's affairs. Therefore, he would only continue to have affairs, and she'd be a doormat.

Now for the "big duh" question: Does this thought bring peace or stress into your life? The client is aware that this is a stressful belief and yet she can't make herself not believe what she beliefs...which is as it should be.

I ask the question, "Why do you hold this stressful belief; how is it serving you?" This is a nicer, and more thoughtful, way of asking the famous Dr. Phil question, "How's that workin' for ya?"

Is the thought "My husband shouldn't have affairs" doing the job my client wants it to do?

It's not preventing her from feeling like a doormat right now, never mind the future.

It certainly isn't giving her any control over her husband's behavior.

It isn't providing her with a roadmap to the future.

It's not protecting her, because she's still married to a philandering husband.

So, while the core beliefs underlying this one—the ones about relationships being sacred and people shouldn't cheat on their spouses—may have served this woman in the past, it doesn't look like they are serving her very well now, except to hold that stance of "I'm right, you're wrong" with a husband whose behavior she is tacitly condoning for now. That's enough for some people. Those people don't bring this particular belief to inquiry.

"Is there a peaceful reason to keep this thought?" The client can't find one and is now ready to move to question four, "Who would you be without this thought?"

What she finds is, as a woman whose husband is having affairs in reality, she can be in charge of her own life (which is what she wanted frim the belief, and couldn't get from it). She is free to stay or to go, to discuss the situation rationally with her husband (whether or not he is rational is none of her business and, again, not something she can micro-manage). She can state her needs and observations without shame and blame (instead of "You cheating #(*$@(*&!!, how dare you? You are dishonest, you don't love me, you want to hurt me, you broke our vows, this marriage is based on a lie!"

Instead, her conversation with him might begin with "I am aware that you are having sex outside of our marriage. I value fidelity and honesty in intimate relationships. I want to stay married to you and I don't know if I can if you are not going to be monogamous. Would you be willing to discuss what's going on for you and how we can move on from here?"

Try asking "How does this stressful belief serve you?" the next time you hit a sticky one...and let me know how it's workin' for ya.


©2009 by Carol L. Skolnick. All rights reserved.

Why We Believe, Part 3: Unmet Needs, or a Tantrum?

Our reasons (which are sometimes motives) for keeping a stressful belief can also be seen as a list of unmet needs: "I need to be right." "I need to be in control." "I need a purpose." "I need you to listen to me."

It's not a problem to have needs; it's fine to find ways to fulfill them. It's only a problem when we expect that the world will meet our needs when there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary that this isn't going to happen. That's when you know that you're not experiencing the stress of an unmet need; you're throwing an inner tantrum.

Fighting with reality in the form of attachment to stressful beliefs that do not serve you (or no longer serve you) can never fulfill our needs. Identifying our needs (as opposed to our desires) is the first step towards understanding the source of a problem, as well as the first step towards the fulfillment of our needs.

Byron Katie likes to say that fighting with reality is about as effective as trying to teach a cat to bark. If you want a barking animal, how much easier would it be to simply get a dog! (Or, if you're allergic to dogs, a burglar alarm. Need fulfilled, cat off the hook!)

This has evolved into a cliche among people who do The Work: "How do I know I don't need ____? I don't have it, and I'm still breathing." That's true, but for most of us, it's not so easy to shrug off a perceived need with a "Katie-ism." We have to see it for ourselves. Still, the word "need" can be problematical.

I give workshops with a teacher of Nonviolent Communication who has a Buddhist background and also does The Work. In NVC, they use the term "need" a lot, especially around authentic communication of said needs. I told her that I wasn't comfortable with the word "need," as I could see where I always have what I need in the moment, that "I need" is a story of the future and therefore never real right now. She agreed that, from a Buddhist standpoint (and a Worked one), there are no real needs, so I could swap out "needs" with "values." For example, "I need connection" becomes "I value connection." That feels truer to me.

So, "I value a serene work environment," communicated peacefully, isn't "You play that stereo too loud! You should be more considerate of your neighbors!" That's a tantrum. Rather, as a practitioner of NVC, or anyone who has identified what they value, would say, "I am upstairs working and finding it difficult to concentrate. Would you be willing to lower the volume on your stereo? " This respects the needs, or values, of the person who likes loud music, without making them wrong. There's no manipulation in it; it's a request, one that may or may not result in the fulfillment of your needs.

If I've done my Work, and I'm clear that I don't need my neighbor to do what I want, and she doesn't turn down the bass, I have a choice to put on noise-reducing headphones, work somewhere else, ask her again...and not go to war with her or with my life, even if it means that eventually I will call the management company to let them know there's a noise "problem."

Next, how a TV cliche can help free us further: Part 4, The "Dr. Phil" Question.


©2009 by Carol L. Skolnick. All rights reserved.

Why We Believe, Part 2: When the Payoff Is Hard to Find

When a client (or I myself) can't easily answer the Question Three subquestion, "Why do you hold this belief? How is it serving you?" I use this additional subquestion: "What do you fear would happen if you didn't believe this thought?" This is another way to reveal how the client has been using the stressful thought to attain or to avoid something.

Example: The client' statement is, "My husband shouldn't have affairs." After doing some inquiry, she still believes this is true. I ask her if the thought is peaceful or stressful and she says, "It's a peaceful thought. We took marriage vows. I didn't agree to his being unfaithful."

"Okay," I ask, "And what is the reality of it? Is he having affairs?" "Yes." "Is that peaceful or stressful for you?" "Well, of course that is stressful."

"It is stressful,' I say, "because it is what is true—he is having affairs—and you want that to be different from what it is."

"I can see where fighting with reality is driving me crazy."

"Then why do you hold the belief that he shouldn't have affairs, when he is? How is this thought serving you?" The client says the belief isn't serving her at all, and yet she believes it, and because she relies on her husband for financial support for her and her children, she won't leave him.

Mext, I ask her what she fears would happen if she didn't continue to believe this stressful thought. Her answer: "If I didn't believe that my husband shouldn't have affairs, I'd be a doormat; he'd just cheat on me forever and I would have to pretend it didn't matter."

Usually, the client's answer to this subquestion points to what is already happening, if only in his/her mind. In this case, my client is complaining about a man who is already having sex outside of their marriage. She already feels like a doormat with the thought that he shouldn't, because it flies in the face of what's true: he does. And she is already pretending nothing terrible is happening, so as to spare her children any grief.

So again, I ask, what is it the payoff for holding this belief? She hopes it will help her not to feel like a doormat. She thinks it gives her some control over her husband's behavior. ("He'd cheat on me forever" is another thought that the client could question.)

The client sees how she has been causing herself stress in the name of trying to get peace. It's an honest mistake, one that I daresay most of us make quite often. It doesn't mean she has to condone her husband's behavior, or divorce him, or stay with him. This is just a window on her inner world.

What followed was that the client realized she didn't really care that her husband had sex with other women (in fact she was relieved that he wasn't pressuring her into sex); only that his doing so would mean she might be deprived of his support. "If he cheats on me, he'll leave me, and it means that I will be without support."

Now, seeing that her "shouldn't" thought was a projection into a frightening and non-existent future (could it be that he wouldn't leave her, or that if he did, she would still be supported?), she was able to be, if not sanguine, at least saner about the situation, aware that she had choices and did not have to be a victim of her husband's behavior.

But what if you believe you really do need things to be different? In Part 3 of this series, we'll look at whether our thoughts are really about needs...or if they are merely tantrums.


©2009 by Carol L. Skolnick. All rights reserved.

Why We Believe, Part 1: Are You Being Served?

In question number three of The Work of Byron Katie, "How do you react when you believe this thought?" we sometimes use a subquestion, "Why do you hold this (stressful) belief?" In other words, what is the payoff for holding that belief? How is that belief serving you? Is there a peaceful reason to keep this thought, one that does not bring you stress, suffering or pain?

Many times, a client's initial response to this subquestion is, "There is no payoff; it's not serving me." When I hear that, I ask the client to sit with that question for few moments and see if anything comes to them.

In my experience, we never attach to a stressful thought unless we believe it is going to do something for us. That "something" might not be a very good benefit, or it may be outmoded...but there always is some reason why we continue to believe what we believe, even if it feels terrible.

Here are some motives for keeping a stressful thought: (You may have others; if you do, and you'd like to share them, please write your motives in the comments.)

-I get to be right.
-I get to feel superior.
-I get a sense of control (over a person, a situation, the universe).
-I get to blame someone or something else for my unhappiness.
-I don't have to look at my part in the problem.
-I don't have to change.
-I get a sense of security or safety.
-I don't have to take responsibility.
-I get a purpose in life.
-I get to keep a familiar identity, a "me" by which I have always defined myself.
-I get to know something.
-I am protecting myself from future disappointment.
-I get an escape clause; I'm out of here!
-The thought may motivate me to do something. (Example: I think that believing "I am too fat" will motivate me to lose weight.)
-I will avoid further pain and suffering.

Some people don't like the word "motive." They think it is a "negative" word. I want to point out that I don't think having motives is inherently bad—a motive can certainly be sincere or for a seemingly kind reason—but it might also cause unnecessary stress.

In pointing out these underlying motives to the client (or to yourself, if you are doing The Work yourself), we are not setting out to make the client wrong for having them. A belief that no longer serves could well have served the client in the past. It may have been a matter of survival to believe, for example, "I'm not safe" if, as a child, you lived in a high-crime neighborhood, or if your parents were violent towards each other or to you. It probably kept you alert to some real danger. If you're applying it to your life now, when in reality you are just fine—and the belief causes you distress when it comes up as the story of a nonexistent past or future—
you may want to investigate the thought and see if you still need it.

What if you can't identify the perceived payoff? Stay tuned for Part 2 in this series: What We Believe: When the Payoff Is Hard to Find.


©2009 by Carol L. Skolnick. All rights reserved.