What about having the client draw ( or using an ingenious computer program) the
positions and fax it to ya?
To: ConstellationTalk@yahoogroups.comFrom: diane@WisdomHealing.comDate: Thu, 5
Feb 2009 18:54:29 -0700Subject: RE: [ConstellationTalk]
Rita,I've never heard of a phone constellation, but have done
distanceconstellations, as have other facilitators. That is, get all the info
youcan from her over the phone, and then do a constellation for her at yournext
workshop. You might ask her to meditate during the time you're doingthe
constellation. If you have a great memory, you can write her or call herto tell
her exactly what happened. I can't remember that well, so I use arecorder and
then transcribe the session and e-mail it. I ask the client tocall me with
feedback and questions after they've read it. Diane
Yankelevitzdiane@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-----Original
Message-----From:
ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx[mailto:ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On ;
Behalf Of Rita MartinoSent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 2:41 PMTo:
ConstellationTalk@yahoogroups.comSubject: Re: [ConstellationTalk]Hello All;I
received a call this a.m.from a woman requesting a phone constellation????(have
not heard of such a constellation taking place) or did I know
aFacilitator/Practitioner in or near Kenai Alaska....which is 3 hours
fromAnchorage... I said I would see if I could gather any information and call
her. Can anyof you direct me further? Thank you in advance and blessings to
you. Rita Warm Regards,Rita Ann
Martinoawakeningfamilyconstellations.com________________________________From:
Franz Kalab <franz@xxxxxxxx>To: ConstellationTalk@yahoogroups.comSent:
Wednesday, February 4, 2009 1:46:29 PMSubject: [ConstellationTalk] Newton -
Fragmentation, Complexity, Integrationand Systemic WorkDear Dan,Today I come
back to your text triggered by Newton. Thank you forsharing! Allow me
sharing further considerations about it. Like a sword toanother, so may a man
be to another. It will not be short, as it refers tono treat for MacDonalds
either. J. R. R. Tolkien (cath.) and C. S. Lewis (angl.) voted for
re-enchanting theworld. Currently versions of their myths, The Lord Of The
Rings andNarnia, have entered the cinemas and images of the masses.
Interpretationsmay be legion and keeping emotions high; which may depict
complexes andprojections involved. In particular Lewis treated the split
of/into scienceand mysticism and their reunion in his science fiction Ransom
Trilogy;most clearly in That Hideous Strength, which seems less known. Where
would you locate the languages Martin Buber employs, say in I AndThou on the
one hand, and in Gog And Magog on the other hand? It seems tome he used
different languages depending on what he treated and still serveswell for an
inspiring example. I propose integrating the development from gods via heroes
to man and theaccording languages, as far as an individual can, to remain a
contemporaryhuman. I mentioned already Van Peursen, who discerns the magic from
theontological from the current dynamic mode of being, observing and
intendingsimilar integration. Can I, after for example Jung, Neumann and
Hellinger,still responsibly live and work with less than the maximum
possibleconscious integration of the unconscious? It may only be functional to
employ any of the languages discerned by Vicoor another, be they three or
thirty. Less may simply turn out in regressionto forms of previous stages. In
his earliest experiment, Vatu Hiva, theNorwegian experimental archaeologist
Thor Heyerdahl concluded, there is noway back to nature. One can regard this
as a philosophical and as apractical advice. It seems important to me for
systemic work, to be aware of approach andlanguage employed and not to confuse
the employed with reality, whichalways will be still more complex and layered
than what I can see. Doing so,I may be able to know more and to achieve more,
while at the same timealso know better how much I still do not know and maybe
never will. I could respond to the current state of complexity and
fragmentation, insubjective experience and in academic disciplines for example,
in variousways, of which many may just be reductionist. I mentioned
alreadydogmatism and enthusiasm as maybe two common forms. Could I
renderconstellation work into forms or religious praxis when any of
suchunconsciously carries me away? This may be as justified as anything
else,but should it find my acceptance? You point into a direction that appeals
to me. I appreciate your quote ofQuote Jung (1953), who spoke the language of
myth, cautioned against losing thisoriginal meaning, Learn your theories as
well as you can, but put themaside when you touch the miracle of the living
soul (p.4). End of QuoteIf I studied the life of Jung well, he came to no end
with learning. And,Jung did not only speak the language of myth (which you did
not say, and Imention only to avoid misunderstanding) , but also the language
of man, forexample when he digs eloquently into the Sprit in Fairy Tale,
withoutleaving the grounds of a science study. Where does this lead to for
constellation work? For me it infers for example, that I can employ shamanic
approaches in aconstellation to deal with a clients intra-personal issue,
withoutconfusing myself with a shaman and remembering from whom all I learned.
Or,as a representative, I can enter the mystic state of Simchat Torah,
withoutconfusing myself with a Chassid and remember on whom all I draw. Or, as
afacilitator I can set up the entire Dutch system of education as relevantfor a
particular school, without confusing myself with the Dutch minister ofeducation
and remember the organisation theorists and facilitators thatinspire me. Does
not the issue of power in and by constellation here lookaround the corner, too?
Is it maybe a taboo? Awareness and consciousness, integration and
individuation, balancingemotion and intellect, which can be cultivated and
trained to some degree,make for me a difference, and help me to remain myself
in all and to be themost for my neighbour. And I still need little to nothing
of all of that,when I hold open the entrance for my neighbour when he enters
with hisshopping bags to friendly greet him. Finally back to Newtons alchemy.
I thought Jung proposed that alchemistsunconsciously dealt with alchemy for
their process of individuation, usingalchemic concepts to project their inner
process onto an outer to accomplishthe inner. What a concept of spiritual
discipline, too. In the developmentof a person like Newton, whose writings on
alchemy I have not read, Icould perceive that he had reached a dead end street
with his achievementsas for his inner development and saw in alchemy what he
could not find inwhat he had achieved before. As he had looked deeper and wider
than somecontemporaries, he might have known better the limitations of what he
hadfound and thus maybe was even more convinced of the possibilities ofalchemy?
I think he had little economic reason to turn lead into gold. Iwonder if some
channelling in our days has a similar function to alchemythen. Thank you Dan
for such good food for thought and inspiration!Franz From: ConstellationTalk@
yahoogroups. com[mailto:ConstellationTalk@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Dan ;
Booth CohenSent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 3:40 AMTo: ConstellationTalk@
yahoogroups. comSubject: RE: [ConstellationTalk] SailingDear Franz and Deborah
I have been a student of alchemy since my undergraduate days in the 1970s
atNorthwestern University. My professor, Betty Jo Teeter Dobbs, had been ahigh
school science teacher in a small town in rural Arkansas. In her late40s, she
was inspired to expand beyond the boundaries of her circumstancesand ended up
getting a Ph.D. in the History of Science at CambridgeUniversity. Her research
topic was Newtons alchemical papers. Thesepapers had been removed from
Cambridge at the time of Newtons death andhidden for two centuries. The great
economist John Maynard Keynesdiscovered them. After examining these documents
over a period of 10 years,Keynes made his famous claim that Newton was not the
first of the age ofreason. He was the last of the magicians. Dobbs was the
first graduatestudent to examine these papers in detail. My coursework with her
was basedon her research.As it applies to the study of Constellations, the
difference between alchemyand chemistry is that the former is based on the
concept that there are twoinextricable qualities of knowledge of the universe:
that which is revealedby God through divine revelation and that which is
obtained by observation.The latter assumes that subjective knowledge is
inherently illusory andunreliable. I have written on this topic at length. So
as not to overwhelmCT readers, I will paste a small portion of text from one
essay on thegeneral topic. This is a precursor to a discussion about alchemy,
fields,and Sheldrake. DanThere is no single history of psychology [in the
United States], but threeprominent streams, each with their own lineages and
epistemologies. Theseare Academic Laboratory Psychology, Clinical Psychology,
and FolkPsychology. The distinction of three streams contrasts to a more
unifiedhistoriography. The standard textbook (Schultz and Schultz, 1992)
notesthat modern psychology has tributaries that trace back to Greek and
Romanphilosophy. However they assert that psychology as an independent
formalfield of study did not emerge as a distinct entity until the last quarter
ofthe 19th century when speculating, intuiting and generalizing gave way
tothe rigors of carefully controlled observation and experimentation to
studythe human mind (p. 4). This application of precise and
objectivemethodologies, first developed in physics, chemistry and biology, has
led tothe development of tools and techniques that have refined not only
thequestions psychologists asked, but also the answers they obtained (p.4).If
answers obtained are functions of questions asked, one can begin byexamining
the fundamental questions psychology seeks to address, or evenmore basically,
the language in which the question is spoken. Vico (2000),in his 18th century
opus New Science, delineates three archaic languagesthat correspond to the
three ages of history: the sacred language of the ageof gods, the symbolic
language of the age of heroes, and the vulgar languageof the age of men. Each
language structures the questions asked and answers received accordingto its
particular orientation. If we overlay the three streams onto Vicosmatrix we
can see they correspond to different ways of knowing. The stream of laboratory
psychology is concerned with the study of mind andbehavior using a positivistic
reductionist methodology. The questions muststrictly conform to what can be
learned from controlled experimentation. ToMcCourt (2001), the soul is as
extinct as a dry riverbed. Its origins aretraced from Aristotle to Descartes.
Afterwards, the soul becomes a medievalconcept, having no more contemporary
validity than bodily humors or theether of the celestial sphere.This
corresponds to the age of man in which the linguistics of myth has beenlost.
Clinical psychology speaks the language of the age of heroes. At this
levelpsychology asks three questions: What are we? Where do we come from?
Whereare we going? When Kepler employed the scientific method of observation
andcalculation to prove the heliocentric solar system, he not only
overthrewPtolemaic cosmology, but the Genesis creation myth as well. The new
scienceof psychology created its own macrohistory giving humanity answers to
thebasic riddles of life. Freuds Oedipus theory or Heideggers Dasein aremyths
that organize the complex data of creation into a coherent narrativeform. Folk
psychology corresponds to the age of gods, using the language ofmystics and
seers to help the individual move out of an ordinary mind intothe hieroglyphic
modes of gods and angels. Unlike the scientists, whowillingly overthrew the
religious world order, the shapers of folkpsychology, from Mary Baker Eddy to
Ken Wilbur, were integrators who soughtto reconcile the scientific and
spiritual world views.The separation of psychology into three streams is not
merely a function ofphilosophical orientation. The relative merits of a pill, a
couch or aprayer as tools to treat mental health disorders can be argued in a
livelydebate among peers. However, the waters of American laboratory
psychologydo not run so deep because its proponents have won such a debate. It
iseconomics that dictates why only three percent of American
PsychologicalAssociation members identify as Humanistic Psychologists.
Medications totreat psychiatric illnesses generate $20 billion in annual sales
revenue, byfar the largest component of the entire pharmaceutical market
(NationalInstitute for Health Care Management, 2002). As Thompson (1981)
observes:As the lie commonly agreed upon, history becomes the apology for
whateverclass is in power
.From the raising of children through the techniques
ofbehavioral modification in the elementary schools to the
philosophicalindoctrination of students in graduate schools, a class of
behavioralscientists has positioned itself at the strategic places of power in
oursecular society
.Small wonder when these social scientists write
history,they write only a history of economics and technology (p. 247).In
addition to these three eras, Vico warned of a fourth age, the age ofchaos.
This would be a transitional stage when civil society collapsesunder the weight
of greed and barbarism and the course of history spiralsback on itself towards
a new age of gods. There now is a great divide between the mechanists and the
mystics. Onecamp of psychology is caught up in visions of total control; the
other iscaught up in spiritual visions. In this age, the three streams have
overflowed their banks and churned thewaters white with confusion. The
experimentalist, who seeks solace fromexistential angst by manipulating the
molecules of the brain, cannot fullyescape from the dark night of the soul. The
transpersonalist, who gainsserenity in Tibetan chanting, struggles with
mounting credit card debts. Ifeither speculating, intuiting and generalizing
or carefully controlledobservation and experimentation could actually unravel
the mystery of thehuman mind, wouldnt psychologists by now have more
fulfilling marriages andbetter adjusted children than bus drivers or actuaries?
It is tempting tobelieve that one stream is preferable to another, but it is
the nature ofthis age of chaos that it continually thwarts our attempts to
stand on solidground.At its source, psychology is knowledge of the soul. Jung
(1953), who spokethe language of myth, cautioned against losing this original
meaning, Learnyour theories as well as you can, but put them aside when you
touch themiracle of the living soul (p.4). Beaumont (Hellinger, Weber and
Beaumont, 1998) uses a stream metaphor toillustrate this point. He tells of a
young man who sat by a river andwondered to himself where it came from. After a
long search uphill, hefound the very source of the main branch. Just as he
began to celebrate hisgreat discovery, it began to rain and tiny rivulets
appeared. He followedone these until he found its source. When he finally did,
he renewedcelebrating until he saw droplets coming off a bird in a tree. He
studiedthe bird for a long time and finally declared its beak was where the
streambegan. Once he got home he told the story of his journey and
discoveryagain and again to a growing number of admirers. After awhile his
storygrew so popular that he no longer had time to visit the river. An old
manwho loved him recognized the danger and asked him where the rain comes
from.The young man began setting a plan to measure the raindrops and follow
theclouds, but in realizing the futility of it all he became ashamed and
jumpedinto the water. The old man thought, Thats a good answer, my son.
Divein, feel the current, let the river carry you. Its longing to go
home,flowing to the source (pp. xvi-xvii).-----Original Message-----From:
ConstellationTalk@ yahoogroups. com<mailto:Constellati onTalk%40yahoogr ;
oups.com> [mailto:ConstellationTalk@ yahoogroups. com<mailto:Constellati ;
onTalk%40yahoogr oups.com> ] On Behalf Of DeborahBreesneeSent: Tuesday, January
20, 2009 8:12 PMTo: ConstellationTalk@ yahoogroups. com<mailto:Constellati ;
onTalk%40yahoogr oups.com> Subject: Re: [ConstellationTalk] SailingDear Franz,
I am not familiar with Kampenhout, but perhaps you have inspiredme to explore
these connections. There is much to be said for synchronicity!Perhaps we will
have more to discuss. Perhaps these words are just ourdifferent ways of saying
much the same things? And perhaps Sheldrake is wiseto skirt the issues of the
psycho-social dimensions of life experiences, lolOn Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 3:14
PM, Franz Kalab <franz@kalab.<mailto:franz% 40kalab.nl> nl> wrote:>
Interestingly I have listened to Sheldrake only a few weeks ago in> Birmingham,
after having studied his A New Science of Life and ThePresence> of the Past.
For my taste he could have dwelled much more on the meaningof> his theory for
the psycho-social dimension. An updated version of A New> Science of Life is to
come out soon. I plan to carefully read it. I have> also read carefully C. G.
Jung on transference and alchemy. I have an> understanding of the similarities
between the concepts of archetypes and> morphic resonance.>> C. G. Jung
described alchemy's function for integration and individuation> to> those who
practised it (like Newton J). The concept of morphic resonance> can> be
compared to the concept of archetypes. In my experience, a field in a>
constellation may be similar to and different from both. I regard> Shaldrake's
field theory and Kampenhout's soul theory as possible framesto> understand
constellation work to some degree. During constellation days I> experience much
mutual love between participants. I could agree to call> constellation one
possible cauldron among many to experience love.>> I still liked you to tell
more about your findings on Sheldrake and Jung.>> Kind regards,>> Franz>> From:
ConstellationTalk@ <mailto:Constellati onTalk%40yahoogr oups.com>yahoogroups.
com<Constellatio nTalk%40yahoogro ups.com>> [mailto:Constellati onTalk@ ;
<mailto:Constellati onTalk%40yahoogr oups.com>yahoogroups. com<Constellatio
nTalk%40yahoogro ups.com>]> On Behalf Of Deborah Breesnee> Sent: Tuesday,
January 20, 2009 7:45 PM> To: ConstellationTalk@ <mailto:Constellati ;
onTalk%40yahoogr oups.com>yahoogroups. com<Constellatio nTalk%40yahoogro
ups.com>> Subject: Re: [ConstellationTalk] Sailing>> I was exploring the work
of Rupert Sheldrake and the concept of morphic> resonance (as an organizing
field), as a reference to Jungs concept of a> unitary science in my
dissertation on the archetype of sovereignty and our> interconnectedness with
all that is. As I have stood in the 'field' of a> constellation, I was aware of
information that I was not usually connected> to. My sense is that this
'cauldron' or field is the crucible of the> alchemical forces - or the power of
divine love?. Its been a while since I> have talked about this so my response
may not be very clear. It may bemore> of an intuition than anything but I do
agree that the binding force is> indeed, Love. Or perhaps even Amore in the
classic sense that it combines> the passion as well as the devotion of divine
love.> You are very kindly welcome Franz>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:29 PM,
Franz Kalab <franz@kalab.<mailto:franz% 40kalab.nl> nl<franz%40kalab. nl>>
<mailto:franz% 40kalab.nl ;<franz%2540kalab. nl>> > wrote:>> > Dear Deborah,> >>
Thank you for your acknowledging and kind words to a newcomer on the> list.>From: ConstellationTalk@ <mailto:Constellati onTalk%40yahoogr ;
I have not thought of that before.> >> > Kind regards,> >> > Franz> >> >May I ask which correspondence you see between ´field´ and ´alchemy´?> >>
work on my own issues. However, since 2005 I facilitate in groups and> > >individually. Since 2006 I participate in the intensives in Bernried,> > >
discourse that there may be many ways to> > fall> > > from a horse. That is, topractically, while already applied.> > >> > > I liked to add to the current
structural or momentary inclination to dogmatism> > > <http://en.wikipedia ;some more wrinkled paper onto flat and other screens.> > >> > > A
on> > > his or her ´proper´ position, to act ´properly´, like forcing her or>voluntarily ´yield´. A facilitator could then force the client tostand> >
<http://en.wikipedia ;<http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Sailing>org/wiki/Sailing>To me, constellation work is in a sense like sailing> > >
summer.> > So,> > > I> > > will have to try it again.> > >> > > Namaste!> > >>By the way, I fell through the exam for a sailing-license last
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]> >> >> >>> [Non-textFranz> > >> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]> > >>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]> >> >
