My Voice SHOULD be back, BUT...
The good news is my voice is back. I don't quite know what happened to it. I can only speculate that it was diet related. However, from a mind/body perspective, it could have been caused by me not expressing myself in some situation or another. In the past, I have had issues with speaking my truth, believe it or not. And every now and again, I get myself into these interestingly sticky situations where I find myself holding back for whatever reason---probably because I've convinced myself that whatever I would say has the power to inflict pain on someone else. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, not saying anything is affecting ME just as greatly.
Speaking of speaking, I was at the Tilford Art Group for an art show last night, and while I was speaking with my friends Vic and Shawn about my personal yoga practice, I said that I should do more yoga on my own.
And Vic responded with, "What do you mean by should?" I tried to come up with this elaborate way of defining what should means without making myself appear lazy. Then she explained, when we say the word should, what we really mean is that we want to want something. And the obvious question is why? Why do we feel that we should want some things. I believe it's for validation or qualification purposes for the ego. For instance, I'm a yoga teacher, among other things. I feel like a good yoga teacher must practice at home every day. I don't. Therefore, do I not consider myself to be a good yoga teacher???
Okay, that doesn't make any sense because I know I am a good yoga teacher despite the fact that I don't do a physical practice at my house every day. So this means that I need to go back and look at how I am qualifying what makes a good yoga teacher. That's the process of using that tricky word should. How about the fact that most yoga is NOT physical? I'm not suggesting that I am a perfect yoga teacher. BUT I don't necessarily need to practice at home regularly. Although it would be nice.
And this leads me to the next questionable word: but. I've been contemplating for sometime now why we use that word in our communication. In my opinion, all it does is negates the statement that preceeds it.
For example, "I think I'm talented enough to participate, but I don't have time," seems like a innocent, normal sentence one might find oneself saying to someone else. BUT, the word but, pits two statements that are mutually exclusive against one another. One has nothing to do with the other. Yes, the person is talented. No, the person has no time to participate. Do we feel that we have to qualify ourselves in statements like these. Instead, why not just say, "I don't have time to participate." Or, "I know I'm talented enough. I don't think I have time to participate though." Both statements become strong affirmations. Neither statement negates the other.
I imagine that because anything is possible, there are some exceptions. If you know of any please comment on this posting. In the meantime, I'm going to continue researching how to write and speak more affirmatively.
Speaking of speaking, I was at the Tilford Art Group for an art show last night, and while I was speaking with my friends Vic and Shawn about my personal yoga practice, I said that I should do more yoga on my own.
And Vic responded with, "What do you mean by should?" I tried to come up with this elaborate way of defining what should means without making myself appear lazy. Then she explained, when we say the word should, what we really mean is that we want to want something. And the obvious question is why? Why do we feel that we should want some things. I believe it's for validation or qualification purposes for the ego. For instance, I'm a yoga teacher, among other things. I feel like a good yoga teacher must practice at home every day. I don't. Therefore, do I not consider myself to be a good yoga teacher???
Okay, that doesn't make any sense because I know I am a good yoga teacher despite the fact that I don't do a physical practice at my house every day. So this means that I need to go back and look at how I am qualifying what makes a good yoga teacher. That's the process of using that tricky word should. How about the fact that most yoga is NOT physical? I'm not suggesting that I am a perfect yoga teacher. BUT I don't necessarily need to practice at home regularly. Although it would be nice.
And this leads me to the next questionable word: but. I've been contemplating for sometime now why we use that word in our communication. In my opinion, all it does is negates the statement that preceeds it.
For example, "I think I'm talented enough to participate, but I don't have time," seems like a innocent, normal sentence one might find oneself saying to someone else. BUT, the word but, pits two statements that are mutually exclusive against one another. One has nothing to do with the other. Yes, the person is talented. No, the person has no time to participate. Do we feel that we have to qualify ourselves in statements like these. Instead, why not just say, "I don't have time to participate." Or, "I know I'm talented enough. I don't think I have time to participate though." Both statements become strong affirmations. Neither statement negates the other.
I imagine that because anything is possible, there are some exceptions. If you know of any please comment on this posting. In the meantime, I'm going to continue researching how to write and speak more affirmatively.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Go back to the main Truth page