03 & 07. Lighthouse and Might House: Apa dan Bagaimana Caranya, Bro. & Sis.?

Every year, millions of people worldwide celebrate Deepawali, also known as Diwali, the Festival of Lights. From India, Nepal, Singapore, and Malaysia to the United Kingdom, the United States, and many other countries, homes, temples, and public spaces are illuminated with traditional oil lamps (diyas), candles, and colourful decorations. Although the festival carries different religious and cultural meanings across Hindu, Jain, Sikh, and Buddhist communities, its widely recognized symbolism emphasizes the victory of light over darkness, knowledge over ignorance, and goodness over evil. 

Beyond its colorful celebrations, Deepawali offers a profound reflection on human transformation: What does it mean to illuminate not only our surroundings but also our thoughts, emotions, and actions? More importantly, how can individuals become living sources of light that guide others through uncertainty while providing the psychological and spiritual strength needed to face life's challenges? These questions resonate with the spiritual concepts of lighthouse and might house, which encourage individuals to transform the symbolic light of Deepawali into wisdom, inner strength, compassion, and meaningful service to others.

The spiritual concepts of lighthouse and might house encourage individuals to become sources of spiritual light and power through elevated thoughts, loving attitudes, and benevolent actions. A lighthouse (Figure 1) symbolizes the capacity to provide direction, wisdom, and hope, whereas a might house (Figure 2) represents the inner strength necessary to remain stable and empower others during difficulties. Together, these metaphors suggest that personal transformation should extend beyond individual peace to meaningful contributions to others' well-being. The celebration of Deepawali thus becomes more than an external festival; it represents an opportunity to cultivate inner illumination and transform ordinary interactions into expressions of spiritual service.

Figure 1. Lighthouse: Providing guidance, clarity, and hope.

From a psychological perspective, the lighthouse metaphor can be associated with prosocial behavior psychological empowerment, and transformational leadership. Prosocial behavior encompasses actions intended to benefit others, supported by psychological processes that promote empathy, cooperation, and concern for others' welfare (Keltner et al., 2014). Psychological empowerment includes four dimensions: (a) meaning, (b) competence, (c) self-determination, and (d) impact (Spreitzer et al., 1997). These dimensions suggest that meaningful guidance involves helping individuals recognize their capabilities, understand their purposes, exercise autonomy, and make valuable contributions. Accordingly, a lighthouse does not make decisions for others but enables them to recognize opportunities, evaluate alternatives, and develop confidence in their own judgment.

The concept of lighthouse is closely related to transformational leadership, as discussed by Suyasa et al. (2022), through four characteristics: (a) idealized influence, which provides guidance through integrity, ethical behavior, and positive role modeling; (b) inspirational motivation, which inspires hope, enthusiasm, and a meaningful sense of purpose; (c) intellectual stimulation, which encourages creativity, critical thinking, and innovative problem-solving; and (d) individualized consideration, which provides personalized attention, empathy, and support for individual development. Together, these characteristics illustrate how a lighthouse illuminates others' paths by providing direction, inspiring positive change, expanding perspectives, and empowering individuals to realize their potential, thereby contributing to employee work engagement through greater vigor, dedication, and absorption.

The behavioral indicators of a lighthouse include listening attentively, providing constructive feedback, communicating meaningful goals, and encouraging independent decision-making. A lecturer becomes a lighthouse by helping students develop critical thinking and confidence rather than merely memorizing information. Parents demonstrate lighthouse qualities when they provide guidance while respecting their children's growing autonomy. Similarly, organizational leaders become lighthouses when they inspire others to recognize and develop their potential. The essential characteristic of a lighthouse, therefore, is not having all the answers but helping others find clarity, direction, and meaning.

Beyond guidance, positive influence requires social responsibility. Social responsibility is negatively correlated with aggression (Chendana et al., 2024). Although this correlational finding does not establish causality, it suggests that greater social responsibility is associated with lower aggressive behaviour. This finding strengthens the lighthouse metaphor by emphasizing that meaningful guidance must be accompanied by accountability, respect, and consideration for others. A genuine lighthouse does not aggressively impose responsibility on others.

Developing lighthouse qualities begins with compassion training. Weng et al. (2013) described compassion training as 30 minutes of daily guided meditation for two weeks, progressively cultivating compassion toward loved ones, oneself, strangers, and difficult individuals. The training significantly increased altruistic behavior, demonstrating that compassion can be developed through systematic practice and translated into meaningful actions that benefit others. In the Lighthouse, compassion training strengthens the ability to provide empathetic guidance (Lighthouse).

Figure 2. Might House: Developing resilience and inner strength to support others.

While lighthouse represents guidance, might house symbolizes psychological strength, emotional stability, and the capacity to support others during adversity. This concept can be understood through psychological capital, comprising hope, self-efficacy, resilience, and optimism. Luthans et al. (2007) showed that these psychological resources form a meaningful construct linked to employee performance and job satisfaction. Hope enables individuals to establish goals and identify alternative pathways, while self-efficacy reflects confidence in their ability to accomplish challenging tasks. Resilience supports adaptation following setbacks, whereas optimism encourages constructive expectations regarding future possibilities. Together, these characteristics provide psychological resources that help maintain stability and offer encouragement during challenging circumstances.

Another important component of might house is emotion regulation. Gross and John (2003) demonstrated that cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression are associated with different patterns of psychological well-being and interpersonal functioning. Cognitive reappraisal involves reconsidering the meaning of challenging experiences, while expressive suppression involves inhibiting emotional expression. Becoming a might house means having many situations that can trigger anger, sadness, or fear, but we choose to respond in ways consistent with virtues/values. Under pressure, we can manage frustration, demonstrate perseverance, offer reassurance, and approach problems constructively.

Within the might-house concepts, supportive relationships exist. Drawing on self-determination theory, Suyasa et al. (2024) state that supervisor support (including support for autonomy, competence, and relatedness) forecasts job satisfaction and is negatively related to employees' intention to leave. Although the research design does not establish causality, the results demonstrate the relevance of supportive interpersonal environments to positive work experiences. A might house, therefore, represents not only personal resilience but also the capacity to engage in acts of kindness (conditions in which others feel supported, competent, and respected). Curry et al. (2018) found that performing acts of kindness positively influenced the well-being of those performing them. 

Developing might house qualities begins with strengthening psychological capital through meaningful daily activities. Hope can be cultivated by setting realistic goals and identifying alternative pathways toward achievement. Self-efficacy can be supported through manageable challenges and recognition of previous accomplishments. Resilience develops through adaptive coping, learning from setbacks, and seeking appropriate support. Optimism involves acknowledging difficulties while recognizing realistic possibilities for improvement. 

To develop lighthouse and might house qualities, we need to use implementation intentions. Gollwitzer and Sheeran (2006) demonstrated that implementation intentions improved goal attainment. These commitments follow an if–then structure. For example, 

• “If my child becomes discouraged, then I will listen before offering advice,” or 
• “If a colleague makes a mistake, then I will provide constructive feedback without humiliation.” 

Such plans help transform intentions into consistent everyday behavior.

Becoming a lighthouse and might house. A lighthouse helps others discover their direction, while a might house helps develop the strength to move forward. When these qualities are integrated, individuals become living lamps that illuminate lives, strengthen others, and inspire positive transformation.

 

References

Chendana, L. E., Michelle, G., Susanto, J. J., Gabriela, A., Gloria, M., & Suyasa, P. T. Y. S. (2024). Pengembangan alat ukur tanggung jawab sosial multidimensional: Usaha mengantisipasi agresivitas pada dewasa muda. Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan dan Ilmu Sosial, 5(6), 2582–2593. https://doi.org/10.38035/jmpis.v5i6.2932

Curry, O. S., Rowland, L. A., Van Lissa, C. J., Zlotowitz, S., McAlaney, J., & Whitehouse, H. (2018). Happy to help? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of performing acts of kindness on the well-being of the actor. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 320–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.02.014

Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta-analysis of effects and processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38002-1

Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 348–362. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348

Keltner, D., Kogan, A., Piff, P. K., & Saturn, S. R. (2014). The sociocultural appraisals, values, and emotions (SAVE) framework of prosociality: Core processes from gene to meme. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 425–460. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115054

Luthans, F., Avolio, B. J., Avey, J. B., & Norman, S. M. (2007). Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 60(3), 541–572. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00083.x

Spreitzer, G. M., Kizilos, M. A., & Nason, S. W. (1997). A dimensional analysis of the relationship between psychological empowerment and effectiveness, satisfaction, and strain. Journal of Management, 23(5), 679–704. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639702300504

Suyasa, P. T. Y. S., Mulyatri, L., & Rothmann, S. (2024). Peran dukungan atasan terhadap intensi keluar karyawan: Kepuasan kerja sebagai mediator. Psyche 165 Journal, 17(3), 241–247. https://doi.org/10.35134/jpsy165.v17i3.409

Suyasa, P. T. Y. S., Pertiwi, M. S. N. D., & Meijer, V. (2022). Bagaimana menjadi pemimpin yang transformasional selama dan setelah COVID-19?: Meningkatkan keasyikan dalam bekerja. Prosiding Serina IV, 2(1), 1617–1622. https://doi.org/10.24912/pserina.v2i1.19952

Weng, H. Y., Fox, A. S., Shackman, A. J., Stodola, D. E., Caldwell, J. Z. K., Olson, M. C., Rogers, G. M., & Davidson, R. J. (2013). Compassion training alters altruism and neural responses to suffering. Psychological Science, 24(7), 1171–1180. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612469537

 

01 & 12. Self-Sovereignty: The Art of Mastering Our Thoughts, Emotions, and Habits

In an era of rapid technological advancement and the growing demands of modern life, people have become increasingly capable of controlling their external environments, yet they may still struggle to manage their inner lives. A leader may successfully manage a large organization but lose emotional balance when receiving criticism. A university student may understand the importance of studying but repeatedly procrastinate. Similarly, an individual may possess extensive spiritual knowledge while remaining vulnerable to anger, anxiety, or excessive attachment. These examples show that the ability to control external circumstances does not necessarily match the ability to regulate oneself. This raises a fundamental question: Before attempting to lead others, have we learned to master ourselves?

This ability can be understood through the concept of self-sovereignty, which refers to an individual's capacity to consciously and responsibly direct their inner life. In the Morning Murli of November 1, 2026, it explains that self-sovereignty involves maintaining control over one's mind, intellect, and sanskars, or deeply established tendencies and habitual patterns. The mind generates thoughts, desires, and emotional responses; the intellect evaluates information, exercises discernment, and guides decisions; while sanskars represent habitual tendencies that influence recurring patterns of behavior. When these three dimensions are consciously directed, individuals become less dominated by immediate impulses or established habits and increasingly able to choose responses consistent with their values and life goals.

From a scientific psychological perspective, self-sovereignty is not yet a widely established construct with a universally accepted operational definition or standardized measurement instrument. Nevertheless, it shares conceptual similarities with self-regulation, self-control, self-determination, and emotion regulation. Self-regulation refers to processes through which individuals direct their thoughts, emotions, and behaviors toward desired goals. Self-control emphasizes the capacity to resist immediate temptations that conflict with long-term objectives. Self-determination concerns acting in accordance with personally endorsed values and autonomous motivation, while emotion regulation involves influencing emotional experiences and expressions. Integrating these perspectives, self-sovereignty may be conceptualized as an individual's capacity to regulate thoughts and emotions, exercise sound judgment, and develop adaptive habits so that behavior remains aligned with personal values, long-term goals, and responsibilities.

Why is self-sovereignty important? Psychological research demonstrates that capacities closely related to this concept contribute to adaptive functioning across multiple areas of life. De Ridder et al. (2012) conducted a meta-analysis of 102 studies involving 32,648 participants and found associations between trait self-control and a broad range of adaptive behaviors. Individuals with stronger self-control were more likely to engage in behaviors supporting goal achievement and personal adjustment. Notably, self-control was also associated with habitual behaviors, suggesting that effective self-management does not necessarily require continuous resistance to temptation. Instead, individuals may develop beneficial habits that reduce the need for repeated conscious effort.

The significance of self-control is particularly evident in educational settings. Duckworth et al. (2019) highlighted its important role in academic achievement, especially when students encounter conflicts between long-term academic objectives and immediately rewarding activities. Students who can manage distractions, sustain attention, and establish effective study routines are better positioned to pursue their educational goals. Similar processes are relevant in professional settings, where individuals must complete demanding tasks, navigate interpersonal conflicts, and make decisions under pressure. Self-sovereignty, therefore, involves more than recognizing what should be done; it includes developing the ability to translate knowledge and intentions into consistent behavior.

Self-sovereignty is also conceptually related to psychological well-being. According to Self-Determination Theory, individuals have three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Autonomy refers to experiencing one's actions as personally endorsed and consistent with one's values. Competence involves feeling effective in interacting with the environment, while relatedness reflects the need for meaningful social connections. Satisfying these needs supports healthier motivation and psychological well-being. From this perspective, healthy self-sovereignty should not be understood as excessive self-discipline, emotional suppression, or perfectionism. Rather, it involves developing the inner freedom to act consciously, effectively, and responsibly while maintaining a supportive relationship with oneself and others.

One important factor in strengthening self-sovereignty is emotion regulation. Gross (1998) proposed a process model describing several ways individuals can regulate emotions, including situation selection, situation modification, attentional deployment, cognitive change, and response modulation. One particularly relevant strategy is cognitive reappraisal, which involves reconsidering the meaning of an emotionally significant situation. For example, someone receiving criticism may initially interpret it as personal rejection, leading to anger or defensiveness. Through cognitive reappraisal, the individual may consider whether the criticism contains useful information for improvement. Although this process does not necessarily eliminate unpleasant emotions, it can support more balanced judgments and constructive responses. Thus, self-mastery does not require the absence of negative emotions; it requires developing the capacity to respond without automatically acting on every emotional impulse.

Another important factor is habit formation. Wood and Rünger (2016) explained that habits develop when people repeatedly perform particular responses in relatively stable contexts. Over time, these behaviors become increasingly automatic and require less deliberate effort. This finding provides an interesting conceptual connection to the spiritual notion of sanskars, although the two concepts are not scientifically identical. Individuals who habitually respond defensively to criticism, for example, may gradually develop alternative patterns of listening carefully, evaluating information, and responding calmly. Such changes require more than awareness of undesirable habits; they depend on repeatedly practicing more constructive responses. Accordingly, self-sovereignty involves not only controlling immediate reactions but also reshaping the habitual processes that influence future behavior.

Determination is another important element of personal transformation. However, determination becomes more effective when accompanied by concrete behavioral plans. In a meta-analysis of 94 independent tests, Gollwitzer and Sheeran (2006) found that implementation intentions positively affected goal attainment, with an effect size of approximately 0.65. Implementation intentions follow a simple structure: “If a particular situation occurs, then I will perform a specific action.” For example, instead of merely deciding to become more patient, someone might establish the following plan: “If I receive a message that makes me angry, then I will P.O.C.: (1) Pause, stand back, (2) Observe, regulate my breathing, and (3) reconsider in my mind to Choose the values before responding to the  situation.” Such planning helps bridge the gap between intention and action. In this sense, determination is not merely a strong desire to change but also the practical preparation required to respond differently when challenges arise.

Self-sovereignty also requires continuous self-monitoring and reflection. Harkin et al. (2016) conducted a meta-analysis of 138 studies involving 19,951 participants and found that interventions designed to increase goal-progress monitoring improved goal attainment. These findings emphasize the importance of observing personal development, identifying obstacles, and adjusting strategies when necessary. Individuals may practice daily reflection by asking three questions: 

Have I directed my thoughts toward meaningful and constructive matters today? 

Have my decisions reflected sound judgment and personal values? 

Have I successfully replaced an unhelpful habit with a more adaptive response? 

These questions correspond conceptually to the three dimensions of self-sovereignty: mind, intellect, and sanskars. Regular reflection allows individuals to recognize progress without assuming that every difficulty represents personal failure.

In practical terms, self-sovereignty can be cultivated through simple daily routines. In the morning, individuals may spend several minutes practising meditation or spiritual remembrance, observing their thoughts, and establishing an intention to develop a particular quality, such as patience, humility, or emotional stability. During challenging situations, they can apply the Pause–Observe–Choose approach: pause before reacting, observe the thoughts and emotions that arise, and consciously choose a response consistent with personal values. In the evening, brief self-reflection can help identify successful responses, recurring difficulties, and opportunities for improvement. These practices represent a proposed integration of spiritual reflection and evidence-informed self-regulation strategies rather than a specifically validated self-sovereignty intervention.

The practical significance of self-sovereignty extends beyond individual development to interpersonal relationships and leadership. Individuals who can regulate their thoughts and emotions may be better prepared to listen to differing opinions, accept constructive feedback, and navigate disagreements without immediately becoming defensive. For leaders, self-mastery can provide a foundation for thoughtful decision-making and responsible conduct, particularly during periods of uncertainty or organizational conflict. Nevertheless, self-sovereignty should not be equated with remaining calm at all times or never making mistakes. Psychological maturity also involves acknowledging limitations, taking responsibility for inappropriate responses, and restoring alignment between one's behavior and personal values. Effective self-mastery must therefore be accompanied by empathy, flexibility, and respect for both personal needs and others' needs.

Ultimately, self-sovereignty represents an ongoing journey toward becoming the leader of one's own inner life. The spiritual perspective emphasizes mastery over the mind, intellect, and sanskars as foundations for personal transformation, while psychological research highlights the significance of self-regulation, autonomous motivation, emotion regulation, and habit formation in supporting adaptive functioning and goal achievement. These perspectives may complement one another without being treated as scientifically equivalent. Self-sovereignty does not imply eliminating every negative thought or exercising complete control over life's circumstances. Instead, it reflects the capacity to remain aware, exercise discernment, and choose constructive responses even when faced with emotional discomfort, uncertainty, or external pressure. 

True self-sovereignty is not demonstrated by controlling everything around us, but by consciously directing our thoughts, decisions, and actions without losing our inner peace, wisdom, and commitment to the values that guide our lives.

---

References

de Ridder, D. T. D., Lensvelt-Mulders, G., Finkenauer, C., Stok, F. M., & Baumeister, R. F. (2012). Taking stock of self-control: A meta-analysis of how trait self-control relates to a wide range of behaviors. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(1), 76–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868311418749

Duckworth, A. L., Taxer, J. L., Eskreis-Winkler, L., Galla, B. M., & Gross, J. J. (2019). Self-control and academic achievement. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 373–399. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-103230

Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta-analysis of effects and processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38002-1

Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 271–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271

Harkin, B., Webb, T. L., Chang, B. P. I., Prestwich, A., Conner, M., Kellar, I., Benn, Y., & Sheeran, P. (2016). Does monitoring goal progress promote goal attainment? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 142(2), 198–229. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000025

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

Wood, W., & Rünger, D. (2016). Psychology of habit. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 289–314. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033417

10. Di Balik Kelemahan/Kekurangan OL, Ada Kebutuhan yang Perlu Dipahami

Pagi ini, ada satu pesan Ayah yang akan saya ingat-ingat, yaitu tentang bagaimana kita memandang kelemahan/kekurangan orang lain. Ayah pernah berpesan, “Janganlah melihat sifat / sanskar orang lain, tetapi sebaliknya berikanlah kerja sama yang lebih kepadanya. Milikilah harapan yang baik dan perasaan yang suci.”

Pelan-pelan ya Bro./Sis., pesan tersebut bukan berarti kita harus menutup mata terhadap kekurangan, kesalahan, atau perilaku yang perlu diperbaiki. Kita tetap dapat melihat bahwa orang lain sedang marah, sulit bekerja sama, kurang disiplin, mudah tersinggung, atau memiliki sanskar tertentu yang menimbulkan kesulitan. Namun, kita tidak berhenti pada apa yang terlihat tersebut.

Ayah saya mengajak putra-putrinya untuk bergerak dari menilai menuju memahami (understanding), kemudian dari understanding menuju memberi kerjasama (cooperation).

Ketika berhadapan dengan seseorang yang perilakunya menyulitkan, pikiran sering kali sangat cepat membuat penilaian. Kita mungkin berpikir, “Dia memang keras kepala,” “Dia selalu seperti itu,” “Dia sulit diajak bekerja sama,” atau “Sudah berkali-kali diberi tahu, tetapi tetap tidak berubah.”

Penilaian tersebut mungkin mengandung sebagian fakta, tetapi akan menjadi masalah ketika berubah menjadi label yang menetap. Setelah seseorang kita tempatkan dalam kategori tertentu, kita cenderung melakukan confirmation bias, kita cenderung melihat perilaku selanjutnya sebagai bukti tambahan bahwa penilaian kita memang benar.

Akibatnya, perhatian kita semakin tertuju pada kekurangannya, sementara kemungkinan untuk melihat kebutuhan, potensi, dan peluang perkembangannya semakin kecil. Di sinilah diperlukan perubahan pertanyaan dari “What is wrong with this person?” menjadi “What does this person need?”

Perubahan pertanyaan tersebut tampak sederhana, tetapi mengubah arah consciousness kita:

01.  Respect. Orang yang kehilangan semangat mungkin membutuhkan seseorang yang masih mampu melihat potensinya ketika ia sendiri sudah sulit melihatnya.

02.  Love. Orang yang berulang kali melakukan kesalahan mungkin membutuhkan arahan yang lebih jelas atau pendampingan yang lebih terstruktur;

03.  Humility. Seseorang yang defensif mungkin membutuhkan cara penyampaian yang tidak membuatnya merasa dipermalukan;

06.  Cooperation. Seseorang yang baru bergabung mungkin membutuhkan rasa diterima sebagai bagian dari kelompok.

08. Unity. Orang yang kurang percaya diri mungkin membutuhkan dukungan (encouragement).

 

Dst.

 

Dengan demikian, tugas kita bukan hanya mengidentifikasi kelemahan, tetapi juga mengidentifikasi kebutuhan yang berada di balik kelemahan/kekurangan tersebut. Prinsip sederhananya adalah: do not merely identify the weakness; identify the need behind the weakness.

Menariknya, Ayah saya tidak hanya mengatakan give co-operation, tetapi “give extra co-operation instead.” Kata extra penting karena justru ketika seseorang menunjukkan kelemahan, kecenderungan manusia adalah mengurangi kesabaran, perhatian, atau kedekatan dengannya. Biasanya, kita lebih mudah bekerja sama dengan orang yang kompeten, ramah, cepat memahami, atau mempunyai sanskar yang cocok dengan kita.

Pesan Ayah menawarkan arah yang berbeda: kelemahan seseorang dapat menjadi alasan untuk memberikan cooperation yang lebih tepat dan yang lebih sadar, bukan alasan untuk segera menjauh atau menolak. Extra cooperation tidak berarti mengambil alih semua tanggung jawabnya atau membiarkan perilaku yang merugikan terus berlangsung.

Extra cooperation berarti memberikan apa yang sungguh-sungguh dapat membantu seseorang bergerak maju. Dasar dari extra cooperation adalah good wishes dan pure feelings.

Good wishes mengubah kualitas bantuan; kita tetap melihat kemungkinan perkembangan di dalam dirinya. Kita melihat kelemahannya, tetapi tidak mendefinisikan seluruh identitasnya berdasarkan kelemahan tersebut. Kita menjadi memapu membedakan antara seeing a weakness dan seeing a person as weak. Pada kondisi pertama (seeing a weakness), kita menggunakan discernment untuk mengenali aspek tertentu yang perlu dikembangkan. Pada kondisi kedua (seeing a person as weak), kita berisiko menjadikan kelemahan sebagai identitas orang tersebut. Dalam kitab suci agama, pernah diceritakan bahwa anak yang paling lemah tetap sangat dicintai dan justru memperoleh greater mercy: “even the last numbered child is very much loved, because he is weak. So, there is greater mercy for those who are weak.”  Kelemahan orang lain sang jiwa, tidak mengurangi respect atau good wishes kita. Kita dapat melihat masalah secara realistis sekaligus tetap melihat potensi jiwa di balik masalah tersebut.

Di samping good wishes, dasar dari extra cooperation juga adalah pure feeling. Pure feelings mengajak kita memeriksa motivasi di balik bantuan yang kita berikan. Apakah kita membantu agar orang lain berutang budi, mengakui bahwa kita lebih mampu, atau supaya kita terlihat sebagai orang yang baik? Apakah kita membantu karena ingin mengontrol keputusan orang lain, atau karena benar-benar ingin melihatnya tumbuh? Dua tindakan yang tampak sama dari luar dapat berasal dari kualitas consciousness yang sangat berbeda. Pure feelings berarti bantuan diberikan demi benefit, bukan demi memperbesar ego pemberi.

Demikian Mas Bro. dan Mba' Sis., pesan Ayah yang akan saya ingat-ingat, setidaknya untuk hari ini. Terima kasih ya Bro. dan Sis. sudah membaca.... atau mungkin bermaksud ikutan mengingat-ingat pesan Ayah? 😍😇🙏🌹