I’ve been wondering about the Witness State lately. When we give a Zero Balancing session in the Witness State, we remain objective and have no agenda, judgment or opinion about what needs to happen, how it happens, when it happens or where the session needs to go. We are not attached to a particular outcome. Considering the many aspects of our nature, I’ve been questioning whether it’s possible to have absolutely no attachment to the outcome on any level of ourselves. Let’s have a think about this together over a glass of wine or a cup of tea.

We teach and learn that as Zero Balancing practitioners, being in the Witness State is an important aspect of giving a good session. Is this true? Why? Would having an agenda interfere? If so, how? What if our agenda is to be helpful? 

Does having an agenda conflict with any other Zero Balancing principles? How about High Regard? Can we have an agenda and hold our client in high regard at the same time?

I recall an earlier discussion about paradigm, also known as worldview, and am thinking about whether one’s conscious awareness of their paradigm has an impact on their ability to remain in the witness state. For example, what if our worldview includes the belief that if someone really wanted to heal they would? And if they aren’t healing, they must not want to. Can we hold this belief unconsciously and still be in the Witness State? Can we hold this belief consciously and still be in the Witness State? 

What about paradigms from other trainings? Many of us were initially trained as Acupuncturists, Massage Therapists, Chiropractors or Physical Therapists. Can we hold beliefs taught in these other disciplines and remain in the Witness State? 

What about our client’s beliefs? Are we in the Witness State if we share our client’s beliefs? If we have a client who was told they cannot be healthy if their pelvis is out of alignment, and we agree, are we in the Witness State?

Are we attached to an outcome when we give a fulcrum? If the purpose of a fulcrum is to balance structure and energy and a fulcrum is indicated where energy is stuck in bone, does the practitioner have an agenda to free the struck energy? If the answer is yes, can one have that intention and still be in the Witness State? 

Is the desire to be helpful antithetical to staying in the Witness State? How many of us have found ourselves wanting to help, wanting the client’s pain to improve or anxiety to diminish? Is this an agenda? Can this desire interfere with healing? If so, how?  

What about clients who feel worse after their ZB? Does that impact us as practitioners? If it does, are we still in the Witness State? 

Can we remain in the Witness State when giving a ZB session to a family member? Or a good friend? Is it harder? Easier? 

Can we honestly say we have no opinion whatsoever about what needs to happen during a ZB session? If the client feels ungrounded and unstable at the beginning of the session, do we feel ok if they are just as ungrounded and unstable at the end of the session? If we don’t, is this an agenda? 

Is compassion part of the witness state? How about kindness? 

Thanks for diving in with me! I hope this has stimulated new insights about the Witness State.