Interactions with our surroundings
We have emphasized many times that we cannot pass off the responsibility for our decisions to our surroundings or to «others». The reasons for our decisions are always ours alone. We ourselves are responsible for ourselves. This cannot be changed.In spite of this the question will certainly arise sooner or later whether we can positively or negatively influence our surroundings, i.e. our partner, our children, the neighbours, our work colleagues, nature etc. The question also arises as to what extent our decisions influence our surroundings. Although we alone are responsible for our decisions it is of course possible that in spite of this there will be some influence in one direction or another.
To illustrate this we can again use the model we have already introduced: The model of the awareness sphere represents our awareness – that is our ability to live the basic rights of existence - as a bright, white light sphere around us. Within this sphere our light is so bright that we can perceive the consequences of our decisions, outside this sphere the light intensity quickly diminishes, so that our perception is no longer clear enough with respect to seeing the consequences of our decisions. In just the same way this also applies to those objectives which are incompatible with the basic rights of existence. We have represented our abilities to achieve these goals with coloured spheres.
In addition we can use the model we introduced in the previous section of the tuning bowls with different sounds for characterizing our objectives. According to this we send out a certain sound with our tuning bowl for each incompatible goal. In making a decision we use as our guideline that objective which vibrates the most intensively, i.e. which sounds the loudest.
1 + 1 = 3: Abilities in a group
We will now look at how the abilities of several persons within a group can mutually support each other. For this purpose we will imagine that these people are jointly working on a task.Let‘s consider first a group of several people with spheres of the same colour, i.e. all members of the group are pursuing amongst other things the same objective X. Let’s first remind ourselves again of the definition of the model: Inside the sphere are the fully-trained abilities to achieve the goal X. The size of the sphere is a measurement of the already developed ability to achieve this goal X.
Figure 11: Overlapping spheres
The similar-coloured spheres of the participating people will often overlap. If two spheres are positioned beside one another so that for example the areas with 50% illumination overlap, then the overlapped area will be fully illuminated in the corresponding colour (hatched area in Figure 11). The area, which is thus fully illuminated through the group together, can therefore under certain circumstances be significantly greater than the area of the individual spheres. The abilities of a group can therefore be greater than the sum of all the abilities of the individual members of this group.
We know of this through our day-to-day life: Many tasks can only be jointly accomplished by a group of people whose abilities mutually complement each other. If for example the task is to carry away a load weighing 250 kg, then 3 people whose individual carrying capacity is 100 kg cannot achieve anything alone. However together they will be able to carry away this load.
What has been demonstrated in this example with physical abilities (strength), is naturally also valid in the intellectual area. In exactly the same way people can supplement each other as far as intuitive perception is concerned and hence they can jointly assess additional information.
This mutual addition of peoples‘ abilities has been used to benefit mankind from time immemorial. In particular the more complex problems are solved by groups of people. Today we use fine-sounding terms for this: We have brainstorming sessions, arrange conferences, meetings, discussions etc. in order to find solutions to particular problems.
We can however also observe similar phenomena in nature, for example in the case of animals the navigational abilities of swarms of birds and fish, the joint hunting of certain predators etc.
In the chapter on the interaction with nature we will again find evidence that we human beings often make use of this «group formation» with nature unconsciously. The white sphere of awareness basically exists in all beings. For this reason additional intuitive abilities are available in the healthy natural world, for example in a forest, on a sea or in the mountains. It is therefore worthwhile making difficult decisions in peace and quiet in a natural setting!
In conclusion we would again like to emphasize that self-responsibility does still exist in a group in spite of all this: We are also fully responsible for those decisions which we make within a group. This responsibility cannot be shared out like a cake but instead remains with the person or persons who made the respective decision.
Other people, or in general all beings, can help us in making the decision, in that within a group additional abilities are available. Amongst other things we can also by this means assess additional information in intuitive ways. We must not however confuse this help with the division of responsibility.
The priorities of objectives
If we assume that we wish to pursue several incompatible objectives, how do we decide in a given situation which of the objectives should guide us? We have already discussed the interaction between objectives and abilities earlier. Thereby we saw that abilities which already existed can influence the choice of guideline when making a decision.As we will soon see, we often also make the choice of which objective we will use as a guideline in making a decision in interaction with our surroundings. Other people, institutions, animals, plants, nature etc. can all have an influence on the selection of our goal in making a decision.
In the tuning bowl model we assigned a certain sound or frequency to each incompatible objective. Compatible partial objectives each receive the same sound1. The more similar the goals are the more similar the assigned sounds. In reverse the sounds are that much more different the lower the compatibility between the goals.
With this model we can now discuss the mutual influences in the choice of the current objective. We assume again that in making a decision we use that objective as a guideline which at this point in time vibrates the most intensively.
If there is a vibrating tuning bowl in our surroundings, i.e. if there is another being in our vicinity who is pursuing a particular objective, then our tuning bowl with the same sound – insofar as we have such a tuning bowl – will be excited into vibrating. We become aware of this objective due to these vibrations. In a manner of speaking it sends signals to us and calls to us: «Here am I, I am the most important objective, please use me as your guideline in making decisions in the present situation». In this way the chances increase enormously that we will in fact really do this: Just like a chameleon we adapt to our surroundings! Whether in the final analysis we really do select this objective as our guideline still depends however on several factors:
If another objective is already vibrating more intensively within us than the tuning bowl, which has been excited from outside, then the objective which already vibrates within us, will drown out the externally-excited tuning bowl. We will not therefore change our guideline.
If we don’t have a tuning bowl with the corresponding frequency, then this frequency cannot excite any vibrations within us. Only those objectives can be activated which already exist within us.
The intensity of the vibrations which affect us can be of different sizes according to the source of these vibrations. On the other hand our tuning bowls also differ in their vibrating ability.
We assume that in making a decision we use that objective as a guideline which at this point in time vibrates the most intensively. We normally do not perceive for ourselves whether these vibrations or the tuning bowl have been excited by external forces or by us personally. The vibrations we have referred to here can change very quickly. We are therefore basically able within fractions of a second to make decisions based on completely different goals. This fickleness in our decisionmaking is naturally something which we would not want to happen too often, so we will therefore look at how we can prevent this from happening in the next section.
We have already discussed earlier the mutual influencing of objectives and abilities. In this we established with our models that the light sphere too can transmit vibrational energy to the corresponding tuning bowl. The intensity with which a tuning bowl vibrates within us therefore essentially depends on the following factors:
On the priority which we ourselves, consciously or unconsciously, are presently assigning to this objective.
On the amount of energy which we have available within us for the realization of our objectives.
On the size of the corresponding light sphere, that is on the abilities we already possess for the achievement of this objective.
On the intensity of the vibrations at this frequency which prevail around us. Such vibrations are created by other beings with the same objective.
Having now established this let us consider how we human beings mutually influence each other: We can imagine a group of people in which all of them are pursuing several objectives, amongst which is the goal of «maximizing personal financial wealth». If this objective is particularly strongly pursued by one person in this group, this person will also radiate the corresponding frequency very intensively. Because of this the corresponding tuning bowls of the other people will be activated; their tuning bowls with the goal of «maximizing personal financial wealth» will also start to vibrate.
As we have already indicated many times, we are predisposed to selecting that objective as the guideline for making a decision which vibrates the most intensively. If – due to the external excitation of the objective of «maximizing personal financial wealth» - we now select this objective as a guideline for making our decisions, we have allowed ourselves to be influenced from the outside. All the people involved cannot normally perceive this activation directly, but only indirectly via the subconscious. The activation of a certain objective amongst the other group members is also not usually a conscious act by the person doing it. In retrospect perhaps individual people from the group will be astonished at their actually fairly untypical behaviour in the group.
With the complete illumination of only partially illuminated areas by spheres of the same colour as described earlier, the members of the group will have available additional abilities to achieve the objective of «maximizing personal financial wealth». Because of this the individual people will normally feel «confirmed» in their selection of their guideline.
How can we protect ourselves from such external influences? This is very easy – at least it is in theory: Using the mechanism discussed here only those of our goals which already exist within us can be activated. In this way no new objectives will be forced upon us, but rather just one or the other of our own goals will be placed in the forefront. In other words: If we don’t have a tuning bowl of the corresponding frequency, then no tuning bowl can also be activated within us! The example given above with the tuning bowls only functions if the two tuning bowls have the same sound. Activation of a tuning bowl is only possible in the frequency of this tuning bowl.
The importance of this fact cannot be emphasized enough: The clearer the goals I set for myself the lower the chances of being influenced by outside forces. If I pursue several incompatible goals then it is at best the priority within these different goals which may be changed by external influences.
If for example I would like to reserve 98% of my energy for my development with respect to the basic rights of existence and the remaining 2% to be on the safe side for 10 other secondary