Preparing a blessing

Francois?

Good evening Frank.

How are you tonight?

I am fine, thanks. I have a lot to share and check with you… I did much thinking and reading and remembering.

So what do you say, what do people want?

People want everything, or most of the things, on a high, generalised level in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.

Needs… they may be different than wants. You need food, not true?

Sure, to survive.

What kinds of foods are going to depend on your wants at the moment, the state you are in, the values at play, influences from outside… like weather, time of day, advertising... All of that will influence your choice of a donut or a healthy salad.

OK that makes sense. So I may want something I don’t need, if I take this argument a little further.

Yes, so true. Or you may need something you don’t really want. Like insurance.

*both chuckle *

The point about Maslow is that it gives a general and broad outline of needs, Francois. If you want to know what people want, you have to get a little more specific.

I worked it out like this… what we want will depend on where we are, with whom and what the surroundings and time are. But even then there is a plethora of choices of what I will do to get what I want, and I will make those choices based on skill and experience – skill in making the appropriate choices, previous experiences. In short I must be comfortable that I am competent to make the choices at hand. It does not end there. I will make choices of what I want in line with my values and beliefs that are at play in that specific context, and perhaps in most contexts – so here to it depends. What is the strongest, my core values or the one that will get reinforced by my actions in that specific context? Then the choices get narrowed even more by how they will allow the expression of who I am. And last but not least, actually the overarching, most deeply reaching and profound, is that for everything I do, am and have there is some greater purpose, some significance that is beyond my small self. *Robert Dilts – Neurological Levels

Hey, that is a pretty comprehensive summary! Would this be useful for groups, teams and organisations too?

Yes, sure. I can imagine that every group has a set of environment/s, behaviours, skills and capabilities, values and beliefs, identity and greater purpose that is more or less coherent. It may be context specific, and to some degree overlap with the sets of individuals. Hey, come to think of it, people may choose the groups they belong to based on their own set of these criteria. That is if they have a choice. Or they may be brainwashed into accepting the collective set of criteria as their own personal set.

You are on a roll! Let’s pull out one of the levels – the outwardly visible one – behaviour, and add to that language; what we do and what we say. You sure have preferences in how you express yourself in your behaviour: you like things ‘indirect’. So let’s digress for a moment and talk about how people [want to] act.

OK. Some people prefer to wait, consider, and be cautious, before acting, being reactive, whereas someone that prefers to be pro-active will act fast, gets things done. Some people focus on achieving a goal, vision, desire, sometimes without seeing the hindrances, whereas others are naturally inclined to identify and solve problems, avoid unpleasant or painful situations. Some people motivate themselves from within, while those with an external locus of motivation need instructions/directions from the outside to become motivated. Another set of these meta programmes is that some people are motivated by opportunities, possibilities, and may have difficulties following procedures, whereas others prefer following procedures and are motivated by following tried and tested methods. Some people prefer their environment to stay the same over time; others prefer gradual change – evolution – some want to add some radical change to that, and others prefer change to be frequent and drastic.

And would you say that groups, even as big as whole cultures, have tendencies to be more of this than the other?

Oh sure! Let’s compare the ancient Greeks and Egyptians briefly. The Egyptians did not like change much and stayed more or less unchanged for 3000 years, they were highly ‘procedural’ with much depending on ritual and season. Rarely were they pro-active in seeking empire. They were utterly goal orientated though – even building big pyramids to ensure a comfortable afterlife. The Greeks were innovative, seeing opportunities in the discoveries and exploits of Alexander the Great, easily adopted other cultures. But they were difficult to keep unified.

Good. Let’s continue in this vein. Remember that the Egyptians attention was also inwardly focussed, where the Greeks were outwardly focussed.

Yes, some people would be focussed on what they are feeling and thinking and experiencing, rather than what they are doing and what effect it has on others… and some by default would prefer people to things and ideas, or vice versa. When some people face adversity they rationalise, think about it and think about thinking about it, while others feel deeply, passionately, and perhaps uncontrollably, whereas some do both in more or less moderate amounts. Some people by default want to see the big picture, and others want the details. Some love working or being by themselves, some like having people around and some like doing things together with other people. Oh, and then there are ‘the rules’. Some people have their own set of rules and don’t care about other’s rules, or all others must fall in with theirs. Other people don’t have their own – they follow the rules of their society, culture and religion. Other still operate by own rules and respect and expect others to have their own rules also.

Frank, when I told you to create a blessing is hard work, I meant that you must find out all these things in preparation.

Ah, I see. And I suppose the execution of the blessing is also hard work because there must be some more conditions for it to be effective..?

Yes. We’ll get there. If you found out what someone wants and let them hear it and have faith in it in the way that is most powerful for them, what you say will have value and effect. Some people need to hear it but once and will go away convinced. Others need to see, and others need to hear from other people too. Some people need to hear it several times…

So they need to be three times blessed.

… and others would need to hear it for a time. Some still need to hear and see some evidence continuously.

The eternal pessimists. They are incapable of faith.

Now, Francois. Are all people that do not take at face value all that are presented to them always incapable of faith? You have just stereotyped and generalised, and that in a negative way. Perhaps the gift of pessimism is that once convinced, their faith is unshakable, and theirs is not an uninformed faith, taken for granted.

Point taken.

Before we part one last thing… remember that all these things are preferences. Everyone has default filters and behaviours, but everyone still make use of all the others during the course of a day. But, when you converse with someone using their default settings, so to speak, the message hits home so much easier.

So Frank, let me see if I can do this. May the rest that you are going to have tonight refresh and energise you in ways you have not yet imagined!

A good start! And a good night to you too.

Not so fast – I have one last objection.

Sigh. What now?

Blessings are ‘performed’ by someone with religious or other authority, on behalf of a deity. I am no priest or patriarch so, me blessing others… I don’t know.

Yes, Francois. This is perhaps a good time to let you in on The Secret…

I’ve read it and seen the movie – it is way too New Agey and esoteric for me. The secret of The Secret is having a well-formed outcome. Your other-than conscious makes it come true. As Paolo Coelho says in The Alchemist – when you want something the whole universe conspires for you to get it.

So you explain something that happens inside a person… Wanting something in the right way puts internal ‘machinery’ in motion. Is that it?

Yes, more or less, Frank. I take ‘universe’ to mean the benevolent, unbound and other-than conscious (it is neither unconscious, sub-conscious, or super-conscious, neither higher nor lower conscious).

Great – that describes one of the three facets of being actualised. The Secret, Francois, is that no one can actualise if they don’t at the same time assist to actualise others. Remember the principle of reciprocity? Or to put it in other words, blessing others requires having done the work on your self to be a blessing.

OK, I understand that. You said three facets...?

Yep, the third facet is that of developing a clear and strong relationship with God – the source of all blessings. You become the conduit of blessings.

So, being actualised is very different from Maslow’s self-actualisation!

Good pick-up! Yes, it means a fully developed ‘self’ with a Purpose greater than himself, who puts people in touch with their Purpose, being the messenger of the Ultimate Purpose.

I am struck dumb.

You will get used to the idea. So let me say goodnight now. You will rest well and while you sleep you may ponder many possibilities of wonderful blessing you could be, and be sharing with people, people all around you or distant people, all in need of words that will give them hope in tomorrow, confidence for today and peace about yesterday… pointing the way to their Purpose as you have found yours. Good night.

Good night, Frank.