One of my pet peeves, one of my biggest complains, one of my unsolvable conundrums has been the issue of "flash in the pan results." 1
Excitement, enthusiasm, motivation, the tools of the motivational speakers lasts about three days... they the humdrum days return with the disappointment, despair, and hopelessness.
Transformation and a new view of life results from transformational programs like Landmark Education. But yesterday's transformation is today's arrogance, or today's despair... the results are rare and short term...
When I measure the vibration of a Landmark Education participant, including the leaders, the average vibration is lower than the general population's.
Why? Because hopelessness ultimately replaces the hope of a better life, of happiness, of health, of a life worth living.
I won't even talk about the so called spiritual conselors, healers, energy healers and such: their results are questionable, and also short lived, if they were there at all.
So, what is the reason all these modalities, all these programs don't produce what they promise, lasting results, a rise in vibration, consciousness, happiness, prosperity, etc.?
Are the people that lead it Scheisters? I have come to realize that they are victims as well. After all you can't teach what you haven't learned yourself, and there is no one who teaches, on Earth, that you need for lasting results, except, starting this week, me.
This week has been a really revolutionary week for me, I managed to see two things that have been completely missing. Now, whether we are still missing some stuff, I don't know. But I know that we have now 100% more than we had before, so we can go further, and the results can last longer, hopefully forever?
I offer a coaching program for the users of my energy products, called Path to Enlightenment coaching. It cost $90 for lifetime access, and you pay that over six months.
I had to price it low enough so people don't delude themselves that I will do the work for them, and high enough so people actually believe that some work can get done on the calls, so they have some risk as well.
It uses up about 10 hours of my time a week, so it is a nice chunk of my time. So why am I doing it, and why am I doing it so inexpensively?
The truth is that I don't do anything for money that I wouldn't do for free. And because my whole life is about discovering, and testing methodologies that can alter life on the planet, I need a laboratory.
A laboratory where I can test, tweak, and develop theories, methodologies, modalities, that can do the job. The most important "ingredient" in a laboratory like this is the test-subjects... in my laboratory the paying participants of the coaching program.
You see, when someone sends me an email about how well my products work, how great they feel, what great results they produce, I only nod, yea, yeah, yeah... but I largely disregard the result: unless I can see it, over time, with my own senses, those results are flash in the pan... and I don't count those.
But when I have a chance to spend years with a participant and keep my fingers on the pulse of their evolution, trials and tribulations, see how they interpret instructions, where they fail, where they stumble, I can really see what works and what doesn't.
Only half of the paying participants every show up. The once that don't show are using their payments to make themselves feel as if they did anything. They are self-deluding.
Some people cancel their membership: mostly they find out that they have to pay a heftier price than just money: they actually need to do some work, which often involves giving up addictions, giving up lying, giving up the stuff that makes them miserable. Most people are not willing... so they quit.
So, what are the two things I discovered this week that give me hope that participants can now have lasting results?
1. Discovered that the ego will not allow you to change anything unless you make an agreement with it to work together... the ego's job is to keep you the same... and unless you alter your relationship to ego, that's it for you: you can't change your view, your habits, your beliefs, your anything: it won't let you.
2. When we examine the root issue, the core issue, the seed level of your life, the modalities I know do not go deep enough: they keep the inquiry on the personal level. That is: their view keep your view at a narrow cone level... and therefore it can't make a difference, not on the long run. As long as things happened to you because of what you did, or what you are, you can't hope for a different life.
The reason your teachers, your seminar leaders, your forum leaders, your councellors, your coaches can't take you there, because they have never been there themselves.
They themselves are miserable, still trying to get happy, still trying to get lasting results, to no avail. They have double the burden: their own, and the burden of having lied to you... when they promised lasting results.
I'd love to have a special coaching series just for those people so they can start helping you in earnest, after I help them in their own lives. I wonder if they can get over their arrogance, and give up that they already know everything there is to know.
Only time will tell... But this assignment is perfect for this week's horoscope:
VIRGO (Aug. 23-Sept. 22): The saxifrage is a small plant with white flowers. It grows best in subarctic regions and cooler parts of the Northern Hemisphere. The word "saxifrage" is derived from the Latin word *saxifraga,* whose literal meaning is "stone-breaker." Indeed, the plant does often appear in the clefts of stones and boulders. In his poem "A Sort of a Song," William Carlos Williams celebrates its strength: "Saxifrage is my flower that splits the rocks." I nominate this darling little dynamo to be your metaphorical power object of the week, Virgo. May it inspire you to crack through blocks and barriers with subtle force.
- FLASH IN THE PAN
1. A Project, person etc that enjoys only short lived success.
2. Something which disappoints by failing to deliver anything of value, despite a showy beginning
This originally had a literal meaning, i.e. a real flash in a real pan. Muskets used to have small pans to hold the gunpowder charge. An attempt to fire the musket in which the gunpowder flared up without firing a bullet would be called a 'flash in the pan'.
origin, The term is known since the late 17th century. Elkanah Settle, in Reflections on several of Mr. Dryden's plays 1687, had this to say:
"although the group had a number one hit, it was only a one hit wonder making them a flash in the pan."