Re: [ConstellationTalk] Intention

From: Hunter Beaumont <hbeaumont@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 14:35:22 +0200

Dear Alison and all,

Yes, I think we all have a lot of interesting stories to tell. I once
tried to start a Rupert Sheldrake inspired Research project that
wanted to document all of the stuff that happens in constellations.
His idea is to develop a new form of scientific research. I really
like this idea. The goal would not be to try to prove anything, but
rather to build a world wide data file of experiences - without any
attempt to verify of prove anything. Just a documentation. If we had a
file of say, 40,000 documented cases, we would have some weight to
initiate conversations with people outside of our circles that also
have good knowledge. Anyway, the project died for lack of support.

I would love it is something like that could be a part of what ISCA
does.

Maybe the time has come to try again.

Hunter
On 04.06.2008, at 14:22, Alison Rose Levy wrote:

Dear Hunter:

Thank you for returning to my question and to Chris, and Max for

your

responses as well.

Bracketing ones awareness, as you suggest Hunter, sounds like a

very helpful

approach to acknowledge what we bring in while allowing that to

recede from

front and center in the awareness. Also your comments on forgetting,
meditation, really spoke to me and there is something Id like to

share.

Ive long noticed that as the workshop day nears its end, that I

am sometimes

tired with my mind a near blank. As people share their issue, it

sort of

washes in and from that emerges one single thing, an impression, a

sentence.

There is often a sense of we dont need a whole constellation

here, and I

tend to do simpler more direct things with the client, often

suggesting that

they or the reps say statements that come up on the moment and

dont sound

like anything Ive heard before. Or Ill offer a guided imagery

contemplation

with whatever shows up in the moment. Ill often feel that I am

near to being

asleep while standing on my feet and doing a constellation. At

first, this was

a little scary because I identified this as almost like a senior

moment, or

worse. But Ive seen over time, that amazing stuff happens then

and some

workshop regulars try to work at the end because of this. Two

workshops ago, a

bee appeared in the room (in fact bees have shown up at a few

workshops now)

and became part of the constellation. Ive always wondered whether

or not Im

losing it and whether losing it is a good thing.

Overall, I have a very focused sort of mind, so perhaps my focus

in the

earlier part of the workshop day has worked the mind muscle until

it releases

and just opens. I also saw a piece/study somewhere that senior

moments are

artifacts not of senility but of a broad attention span that

does not

filter. The article here discusses that:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/20/health/research/20brai.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=ag
ing+brain&st=nyt&oref=slogin

Many thanks and I will watch the Jill Taylor piece.

Alison

Dear Alison

I want to pick up your question, because I think it is central to

all

forms of psychotherapy AND spiritual work.

Obviously what you (and your scientist friends) are thinking about
must be true. It seems unavoidable to me NOT to bring our past into
our work _ it may take the form of our language, our cultural

values,

our personal history, our training. I can't imagine a life that

could

occur outside of such "correlations/experiences". On the other hand,
cross-cultural psychotherapeutic work and spiritual work has made
clear that there are disadvantages of imposing one set of values and
assumptions on another person.

So, the situation as I see it is, we can't do without that

happening,

but we want to avoid it happening any more than is necessary.

My own personal answer has been to do ongoing, deep personal work to
help identify my own biases, prejudices, fears, limitations and
resources to the best of my ability. In this way, I have a better
chance of recognizing when "my stuff" is getting in the way. I know
from conversations with you and Dan that you also support this
approach. It's not a cure all for sure, but it sure does make things
easier. The other major thing that has helped me personally is to
listen to clients when things have gone wrong. Obviously when
something goes "wrong" clients often are attacking, blaming,

avoiding

personal responsibility, but often there is also wisdom in what they
say, and hearing it with an open heart can be an important part of

our

training.

The third thing is the phenomenological technique of "bracketing"

that

I talked about before. Long before I got into Gestalt and Humanistic
Psychology and phenomenology, I remember reading that Jung once said
(in his autobiography, if I remember correctly) that he had analyzed
over 80,000 dreams, but that he tried to forget everything he knew
when approaching a new dream. That stuck in my mind, because I
couldn't imagine how he could forget what he knew. I'm getting old
now, and so it's a lot easier to understand forgetting :-). Anyway,
that was my introduction to bracketing, and I've been practicing

ever

since.

I don't think it is an absolute thing. Obviously, we remember at

some

level, but we turn the brain functions over to some other part.

Right

brain perhaps. Btw, did you see the talk by Jill Bolt Taylor on
TED.com? Speakers on TED.com get 18 minutes to give the speech of
their lives. It is a great resource. Here is the link:
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/229
.

Anyway, that's all for now, but I did want to pick up your great
question.

Hunter
On 31.05.2008, at 14:02, Alison Rose Levy wrote:

Dear Hunter and All:

Thank you so much this is tremendously helpful.

I once heard Stephan Hausner say (and I hope that I understood/

remember

correctly) that he sometimes has an inner picture/hypothesis about

what may be

going on, but at each step, he takes a step back from that to see

if the

evolving constellation verifies it or not and Ive taken that

approach as a

model in practice. In doing so, Ive observed that sometimes it

does evolve

along the lines of the unspoken hypothesis and sometimes it

evolves in a

completely different way.

My question is this: since I am working with scientists who are

studying the

phenomenon of intention, Ive also wondered if even the unspoken

hypothesis or

picture that I have could function to influence the way the

constellation

unfolds? In effect, serving as an intention. As a facilitator, I

carry an

inner archive of past correlations/experiences and no matter how

much I strive

to be open to the new, that is present. How to hold and work with

that?

Alison

Dear Barbara,

That's an interesting question. As you know, there are many

different

views about what representatives' reactions in a constellation
actually mean and how to utilize them.

I support a very phenomenological position. Phenomenologically,

when

representatives turn around it the only thing I can know for

sure is

that the representatives turn around. Any additional meaning it

may

carry must emerge from the constellation itself.

According to this position, any other meaning it may have should

not

be imposed on it from our previous experiences in other
constellations. Obviously there are patterns that repeat over and

over

again, and our previous experiences in other constellations are a

part

of what we get paid for to facilitate, but I feel strongly that we
need to remain methodologically "clean" and treat all

interpretations

as hypotheses. The only source of knowledge about the meaning of a
movement comes for the constellation itself.

If you watch the tapes from Hellinger's early USA trips, you will

see

the same representatives appearing in different cities. You will
notice that some representatives react to any systemic turbulence

with

a favored reaction. Some fall down, some start to sway or shake,

some

get weak. Once we noticed this repetitive pattern in

representative

reactions, we became very cautions about interpretations.

There is a concept from phenomenology that Erv Polster, a well

known

Gestalt therapist, picked up called "bracketing". That means that

the

facilitator suspends any interpretation as much as he or she can.

So, this is most likely more than you wanted to know, but your
question gave me an opportunity to raise this issue in the

forum. I

saw that you have already received some suggestions about how to
interpret it, but my recommendation nevertheless is not to

interpret

at all (ultimately not possible, I know, so let's say as little as
possible). That is, I recommend not trying to know, but to remain

open

and curious about the possible meanings. Premature knowing closes

down

curiosity and diminishes the openness of the knowing field.

This by the way, is a place where Bert has been inconsistent in

his

teaching. At some times he has eloquently defended the
phenomenological position, and then at other times, he has

abandoned

it all together. I don't think it is necessary to be consistent,

but I

have seen that many students have been confused and haven't

noticed

this inconsistency in his work.

Just to be clear, I realize that many very skillful facilitators

see

this point differently than I do, so I am not saying that the

position

I am defending is the RIGHT one, but I have found it to be a huge
support in helping me to protect myself and my clients from the
grandiosity that haunts the constellation work field. I feel

safest in

a certain kind of unknowing.

Thanks for the question. I hope that it opens a fruitful

discussion.

Hunter

On 30.05.2008, ad 22:41, Barbara Eggenberger wrote:

I have a question about what it means in a constellation when
someone is
slowly turning around and around as if looking in all

directions?

Someone
once said that it is an indication of a perpetrator and if that

is

so, can
someone explain it to me? For instance, does it mean that

person is

representing a perpetrator or is looking for one? Also, what is

an

appropriate response? I have had this show up in three separate

cases

recently and though I was able to reach resolution, I find

myself

feeling
uneasy that I might be missing something important.

Logo

www.barbaraeggenberger.com

916.484.5016 503.727.2595

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hunter Beaumont

hbeaumont@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:hbeaumont%40t-online.de>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hunter Beaumont

hbeaumont@xxxxxxxxxxx

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hunter Beaumont

hbeaumont@xxxxxxxxxxx

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [ConstellationTalk] Intention
  - From: Cornelia Benesch

References:
- Re: [ConstellationTalk] Intention
  - From: Alison Rose Levy

Re: [ConstellationTalk] Intention

Other related posts: