Guilt 101


[Michael_Entity]: “Guilt” is simply another funnel for the manifestation of the Chief Features. Guilt is fear-based and, although a valid method for experimentation, does little in regard to what it appears to be accomplishing, which is determined by most as “learning a lesson”. Many believe Guilt helps generate a certain amount of consciousness about ones behavior, but from our perspective, it is a false awareness.

There are 7 forms of Guilt, each relating to the Chief Feature from which it stems. There are 2 sources of Guilt: Your own Guilt, related to your Primary and Secondary Chief Features; and the Guilt induced from someone else’s use of their own Chief Features. Based on your own Chief Features, it may be easy to identify what type of Guilt you experience, if any, but the Guilt induced from Others may be more difficult to identify. The depth and intensity of Guilt grows stronger as one progresses through the Chief Features.

Self-deprecation Guilt is considered to be the most “useful”, and it is the most common and pervasive of Guilts. We do not agree that Self-deprecating Guilt is “useful”, of course, but many have claimed a benefit for feeling or imposing this type of Guilt, as it helps manage social situations. This Guilt is so acceptable and encouraged that even our own Students may find our perspective surprising.

Self-deprecating Guilt can most easily be seen in “apologies”, “accommodation”, and “compromise”. We refer to all these terms in quotes as the ineffective, officious versions reflected from that place of heightened false courtesy. This Guilt is what is commonly considered “healthy” since it appears to allow a flow of events to occur with little interruption, as in “keeping your mouth shut”, or “not rocking the boat”, “not questioning”, “leave well-enough, alone”, etc. We state that this Guilt is not truly useful or efficient, as it is not based in mutual consideration. Self-deprecating Guilt is extremely one-sided in its “benefit”.

Most “apology” serves only to pacify and relieve responsibility in a situation, certainly not to evolve or resolve the situation. Again, Self-deprecating Guilt is so common and accepted that it may be difficult to see these “courteous gestures” and “sincerity” as Guilt induced.

Self-deprecation Guilt stems from false and evasive consideration. Guilt in this form has its focus on irresponsibility. This Guilt says, “I’m so sorry” or “you should be sorry”.

Self-destruction Guilt is the second-most common form of Guilt, seen readily in the Third Internal Monad (Teens) as the Chief Features are originally being selected. This Guilt is also the motivation behind most “heroic” acts.

Self-destructive Guilt results in such a distortion of what the life is worth that it is left with only one option: to end it. This is due to the basic fear of unworthiness, and further understood as the “fear of using too much”. The Guilt induced from this Chief Feature wants you to know that life is being wasted on him or her; therefore it is his or her responsibility to either relieve the planet of this burden, or sacrifice the life as a means to prove its worth.

There may seem to be a lack of “everyday” evidence that this form of Guilt is so pervasive, but this is due to the taboo generated around the deaths of those who have been affected. Whether in this culture or another, suicide, illness of a self-destructive nature, and sacrificial “heroism” become highly regarded and utilized as a catalyst for idols and false projections of importance. This is simply the way the Human Sentient chooses, in most cases, to relieve the reality of this troubling impact. Murder is the result of this Guilt being imposed on another, taking the life away from a fragment that the Self-destructor feels amplifies his or her own worthlessness.

Guilt in this form has its focus on “punishment”. This Guilt says, “I’ll show YOU”.

Martyrdom Guilt is more obvious when it is in effect and is feels more familiar than Self-destructive Guilt, though in reality it is actually less pervasive. Guilt, here, is based on fearing lack of control of space.

This Guilt results in the seeming inability to steer events to a place of satisfaction, for self or for others. When this Guilt is acted out, it seeks immediate manipulation of others so as to divert attention from that which is deemed out of control. In other words, this Guilt will complain, generate aches and pains; dramatize slight emotional wounds. These situations are generated as a means to gain a sense of control over the life, and to force others into supporting this, because if you do not focus on the wounded, you are Guilty, too.

This Guilt is focused on false consolation, given or received. This Guilt says, “That wasn’t supposed to happen.”

Stubbornness Guilt is still pervasive, but less so than Martyrdom. This Guilt stems, of course, from the fear of change, so the Guilt focuses on “incapacitating” or “immobilizing”. This Guilt convinces those who experience it, or those it is imposed upon, that something he or she has done has had negative effects that halted something positive. This tends to have the fragment who is “guilty” halted immediately. This Guilt says, “You hurt someone.”

Greed Guilt is not much less pervasive than Stubbornness, but as you can see from the progression, each type of Guilt becomes more Invasive, rather than Pervasive. The earlier Guilts may be more freely engaged in, supported, and more acceptable, thus more Pervasive, but the latter Guilts become more extreme in their impact, thus more Invasive.

Guilt stemming from Greed, of course, is focused on “not having enough”. This Guilt creates a dynamic between fragments that no longer allows giving, but instead turns all forms of sharing into Taking. This Guilt works to chain individuals to events, situations, or people, because of an extreme sense of imbalance in terms of what is Needed. In the case of this Guilt, what would normally be Giving (to or from) is transformed into Taking, because that which is Needed is not truly available from that which is the focus. This Guilt could be said to be “over-obligation” or “over-obliging”.

Greed Guilt says, “But I NEED you”, or “But you NEED me”.

Arrogance Guilt is even more invasive. It stems from “vulnerability”. This Guilt focuses on false compensation, meaning that it forces a false remedy or false solution to a situation that has not been fully comprehended. This Guilt wants someone to pay for the sense of exploitation of someone’s vulnerabilities.

This is the Guilt that says, “You were/are WRONG/BAD”.

Impatience Guilt is the most invasive of all Guilts. It stems from a sense of “lacking control of Time”. Since this Guilt senses such extreme overwhelm of Time before true resolutions can be made, or solutions found, it is also then the most generally hostile, if not violent, of all Guilts. If plans, people, things, ideas pass too quickly, or not quick enough, the Guilt develops swiftly and forcefully.

This Guilt results either in the premature leaving of a situation, such as a relationship in turbulence, and a strong desire for everything to “just STOP”, or it can result in the constant badgering and belittling of anyone who is apparently not “keeping up with” the Impatient one.

This Guilt says, “It’s too late, or doesn’t matter now, anyway”. This Guilt focuses on false resolutions and instant solutions. This Chief Feature and Guilt is the primary contributor of domestic violence.


Guilt is taught. Guilt is learned. Not everyone experiences Guilt. Those people who do not experience Guilt, Invasively or Pervasively, are many times a target for those who are Guilt-ridden. It is considered most inappropriate to not obviously show some form of Guilt for something in your life. We disagree and say that those who feel no Guilt are most aware, mutually considerate, comfortable with his or her boundaries, and freely managing his or her Centers as a form of navigation through the life and the lives of others.

Though Guilt is linked to a Chief Feature, and in many cases your own Chief Feature may the source of that Guilt, we would suggest that, in most cases, the Guilt experienced has more to do with the person who IMPRINTED the idea of Guilt upon you. This could be a schoolteacher, a parent, a sibling, or a group who shared a Chief Feature freely.

Guilt is learned during the second internal monad, along with the word “no”; around the time you learn mobility of your own (about the age of 2). Depending on the ROLE of the Imprinter, your Guilt may be a connected with the Guilt instilled from the Imprinter.

Despite the fact that Guilt is linked to Chief Features, each Role can also become adept at inducing a specific Guilt reaction from other fragments, regardless of either party’s habitual Chief Features.

Here are the Guilts as they relate to each Role:

Servers = Self-deprecating Guilt
Artisans = Self-destructive Guilt
Warriors = Martyrdom Guilt
Scholars = Stubbornness Guilt
Sages = Greed Guilt
Priests = Arrogance Guilt
Kings = Impatience Guilt

Imprinted Guilt can carry for generations, beginning with, and retaining the strength induced from the original imprinter’s ROLE.


In terms of what you can do to alleviate Guilt, it is best to evaluate exactly which Guilt is being utilized most obviously. It will be easy to think your Guilt is a combination of Guilts, but one will stand out, and that is where you can start. This can take some evaluation, but with a little specific observation, it can be done. Based on your conclusion as to which Guilt you are most prone to inducing in others, or reacting from, you can then learn to dismantle this seductive pattern.

Now that we have delineated the types of Guilt, offered some phrases that might help you to recognize their “voice”, and differentiated their possible sources, we will now discuss the means to dismantle Guilt and address some questions.

There are many individual ways created to handle Guilt, but we will share three ways that are universally applicable.

Before we delve into these areas, we feel it necessary to understand the dynamics of BLAME.

Blame is simply “unclaimed” anger or unprocessed anger (anger=disappointment), many times the results of defense against the feeling of Guilt. Blame acts as a holding space, a buffer, for the person who is experiencing Guilt, whether this Guilt is self-imposed or allowed in from another source. Blame creates a false space for “healing” while deflecting Guilt, providing justification for doing nothing. For instance, a person may feel angry because of another person’s behavior, but may then feel self-induced Guilt for feeling angry, deflecting his experience of Guilt through the use of Blame, then internally or verbally taking a stance. This deflection leaves the work of processing to someone else. This method is usually highly ineffective, and even when apparently effective, it is without true resolution.

We bring up Blame because in the first tool for dismantling, there may be a tendency to point to a source for your Guilt, and then to Blame that source, rather than do the work to dismantle its hold. Instead, it is a False Personality reaction as a means to make space, to attempt to center the self. Instead of creating space for centering self, the personality finds security in the Blame, and leaves it at that.

If you choose the route of Blame, we do not have an inclination to steer you one way or another, but we do mention here that many times, Blame can result in a fragile immune system.

In short, Blame is the want for another fragment to claim responsibility for the results of your own choices or reactions.


Accepting and Maintaining Your Own Healthy Boundaries

When you believe your Guilt has been Imprinted or Induced:

”Photograph” the moments (capture the moment mentally for conscious examination) when/where Guilt is experienced. It is not necessary to determine the form of Guilt, in terms of the Chief Features, unless you choose to delve deeper. All that is required of this method is the realization that some interpretation of an event or action has become based on someone else’s ideas, imprinting, or impositions, and that you are not required to validate someone else’s fears. Guilt can be self-induced or allowed in through the influences of an outside source, but the choice is always yours to utilize it against yourself or not. We can suggest that in situations allowing for some amount of flexibility to state quietly, internally, “This isn’t mine.” If appropriate, this statement can be spoken aloud, gently and peacefully, if you believe the party involved can “hear” you.

It is important to note: no matter how much of a benefit you can see Guilt providing, it is still an experience that is not necessary for an individual to endure or grow; therefore, it is your individual choice to release it, retain it, or impose it, but it is never necessary or beneficial.

To summarize, the first and most accessible method for dealing with Guilt, which is often induced from external sources, is in the simple noting and releasing of the moment it occurs. This fluidity will generate a “smoother surface” to your self and as Guilt is experienced in the future, or an imposition attempted, the event will “slide off” more and more easily.

Transform the Guilt (play along)

For some forms of Guilt, you simply be refusing or avoiding taking the actions that may alleviate that Guilt. You will know if this is the method for you if you have a “haunting” feeling about what you “could have done” or “should have done”, or “could do” to “fix it”.

Guilt is only as meaningful as your accommodation of another’s fear, or your own. This means that no Guilt is ever truly valid, however insidiously interpreted, integrated, or implemented. With that in mind, “playing along” and moving through the energy that is the Guilt, can lead to a transformation of that Guilt. This can be further understood in the phrase, “the only way out is through”.

It will be your task to determine what steps are needed as a means to follow through and transform the experience of Guilt. A simplified example may be the “giving in” and saying the guilt-induced, expected “Bless you” to the person who has just sneezed, even when you personally feel this form of exchange is silly. That action accommodates the Guilt (plays along), but moves you through to a resolution, nonetheless. You may then find that you can reinterpret the situation as it arises, changing the event to mean more that a sneeze affords you an opportunity to kindly acknowledge someone. You can decide that when you say the “blessing”, you will mean it, rather than feel the pressure and Guilt as your motivation.

We never encourage acting against individually defined parameters, however, to accommodate the Guilt to a point that you can then transform an experience, this method can be empowering.

Your accommodation of some forms of Guilt may require something far stronger and long-term in its process than our simple example above. It may require that you move the Guilt to a more diffused state, thus creating a more manageable level of Guilt. This can be done through the act of True Apology.

True Apology IS NOT the solution. True Apology is dissolution. True Apology is the act of breaking down an accumulated event for the purpose of generating mutual resolve. We do not guarantee its success of course, but we have seen that apologetic acknowledgement, however fearfully induced, can tend to soothe all fragments involved, allowing for progression away from Guilt and into peace.

If True Apology is not accepted verbally, it may require that you take meaningful actions, communicate innovatively, allow vulnerability, anything to bring you to the level with which you feel the Guilt is moving you to make something “right”.

Apology is not going to remove the Guilt; it will merely make it more manageable, which is why false apologies are mistaken as solutions.

Many times, brooding over whether to take an action or not, only breeds more Guilt. Taking actions, thinking things through as to what you can do to “make things better for now”, may very well diffuse a pattern. You can then take evermore-appropriate actions to reach freedom and peace.

In short, method two would be to “do something about it”, putting Guilt in a position more clearly defined and manageable, acknowledged and potentially less powerful.

Accepting and Living with Guilt

This is the level with which a person may need to turn if all means for addressing the Guilt are unavailable or too overwhelming. It would not be amiss in this case to resign, surrender to the Guilt. If you are in this position, you have reached a place that some part of you feels “deserves” the Guilt. It is then that you may submit to your experience, indulge, and rest into it. This will stop the internal struggles; allow your “messages” and “lessons” to be heard, moving you to a space where you can eventually take action (as in method two), and finally bring you to the potential capability of alleviating Guilt altogether (as in method one).


It may have been noticed by some students that this process is the empowering Triad, with method one being Negative, method two being Positive, and method three being Neutral. If you are unfamiliar with this process of the Triad, we can summarize by simply stating that all motion and progress moves through these phases in some order, Positive (the more active aspect of the event), Negative (the more internal or inactive aspect of the event), Neutral (the place between the other poles, allowing the experience to just BE).


[Qitara] Is guilt ever appropriate? Say, if one were to murder another, would guilt be the appropriate feeling for that action to keep one from doing it again, or would remorse be more appropriate?

[Michael_Entity]: We have never seen Guilt act as a deterrent. It is a delay of many things, including the “lessons” brought to bear through the experience, but certainly not a means for creating valid growth. Guilt’s only “purpose” is to satisfy another fragment’s ideals that you have either allowed or had imposed upon you.

As we have stated, it may be falsely satisfying to see a murderer, or even a person who bumps you in line, feeling degrees of Guilt, but it only serves fear. It will always be your choice to choose love or fear, and you are free to choose the false satisfaction fear presents, but we do encourage choices based in Love only because, as sentience, it “feels better” and serves the apparently inevitable search for reunion.

What keeps a murderer from murdering again is determined through love, not fear.

Guilt, remorse, regret, grief may be a chosen path for many as a means to discover love, but it is inefficient, however popular. As the soul grows, so does its efficiency in gathering and processing experiences for evolution. This is why the Old Soul begins to choose less Guilt and regrets for the life.

In the case of a murderer, a larger perspective is needed to truly grasp the nature of the event and this simply is not an easy task, especially in any culture other than an Old Soul culture. The irony is that by the time an Essence can understand the nature of murder, it no longer participates in it. In other words, the act of murdering, itself, removes most capabilities for understanding the event. Thus, Guilt is ineffective and would only serve as a protective measure. The Murderer will have his or her time between lives to grasp the nature of the event to its fullest. Murder is understood through grasping the nature of the event for what it IS, not as it “should be” or “should have been”, and this allows the Murderer to learn new ways of making choices.

So in answer to the question as to whether Guilt is ever appropriate, we would say we have never seen it to be appropriate to what its supposed intent is.

[Carolyn] Michael said that apology is always fear-based, and I understand that most guilt is useless and counterproductive. But in a perfect world we’d always look where we’re going and never miss appointments & never get so excited that we spill our beer on somebody at a hockey game. However, that is not the case, and with the current trend of rudeness & “in-your-face” verbal exchanges, I can’t see how NOT apologizing for the occasional faux pas (sp?) we all make is going to improve the situation. Those little apologetic exchanges between strangers, especially, seem to “grease the wheels” of social interactions that might otherwise be highly unpleasant or even violent. Or am I missing their point here?

[Michael_Entity]: We have stated clearly that to “apologize” is strongly supported and recognized as important in your culture; it is the only means you have for satisfaction at this point, for certain exchanges. This will continue to be the case as you move from a Young Soul culture to a Mature Soul culture. Passive apologizing can even be attributed to the early Mature Soul thinking, in general, used for the purposes of “improving” basic cultural and social interactions among the soul ages. It is a crossover from the “rudeness” of the Young Soul to the “recognition of others” inherent among the Mature Souls. In this context, apology is seen as meaningful and valid, but as we have stated many times now, it is simply inefficient and serves to support something other than what it appears to be supporting.

To make the point: when your culture recognizes “a step on the foot”, or “the spilling of a beer”, or “the lateness of an attendance” as not personally intended, your culture will be free from Guilt. When you no longer require punishment or retribution for simple “faux pas”, you are free.

We do not suggest you stop apologizing altogether. To apologize or not, whether passively or truthfully, is your choice. We were merely responding to this within the topic of Guilt.

When in a situation that you deem calls for apology from yourself, you may be using method two as described above to process the Guilt and move forward. This, then, can be considered Good Work. It is another situation entirely when you require another fragment, or another fragment expects you, to behave within the confines of Guilt. To use True Apology to move through a situation is valid, but to expect it or to impose it, is the potential weaving of shared karmic ribbons or self-karma.

Question 1) Do the different guilt types surface according to different situations? Do they occasionally work in tandem?

[Michael_Entity]: Yes, to the first question, Guilt will adjust to circumstances. It is ‘source-induced’, ‘self-induced’ or ‘situational-induced’, each relating to a Chief Feature expression.

Source-induced means that another individual was allowed to influence your perceptions, creating conflict internally. The Chief Feature would be related to their source.

Self-induced relates to the general impact of your own Chief Features against certain events.

Situational-induced means you choose to behave in a way that the situation imposes or requires. This can be called ‘culturally-induced’ as well. This is where the pervasive need for apology can be found.

In answer to your second question, yes, more than one Chief Feature can easily be found in many situations of Guilt.

Question 2) Would positive affirmations help as a tool in dismantling guilt? I’ve been playing around with affirmations designed to “fit” my Overleaves, esp. the CFs, to try and keep myself closer to the positive poles. Too early to tell if it’s working…

[Michael_Entity]: Affirmations are only as effective as an individual believes them to be. Most affirmations are “bridges” across a situation and can allow you to refrain from indulgence in fears, but it is through your actions and responses that a belief (affirmation) becomes personally effective and true. For instance, you may go your entire life hearing repeated affirmations of your Beauty, and with one comment that you are ugly it is all shattered. It is clear that the power here remains in your ability to respond and act within your own parameters. No amount of affirming will change you, unless actions, thoughts, and feelings are accepting of those affirmations. We see affirmations as a means to carry you briefly through a moment or event, but we have seen little, if any, affect in transforming anything on their own.

Question 3) I’m not real clear on Martyrdom Guilt. Would Michael elaborate on this one a little, and/or anybody out there who “gets it,” can you post an example of how it manifests? I’m just not getting a concrete picture of it.

[Michael_Entity]: We stated the Guilt as focused on “false consolation” and its voice as being “I didn’t mean to” or “that wasn’t supposed to happen”. To elaborate, this voice comes from having ulterior motives, lack of direction, or a sense of lacking control over an event. When the event unfolds against the ideal, the Martyr Guilt will remove responsibility by stating that he “didn’t mean to have it end up this way”.

As an example, those with Martyrdom Guilt can sometimes assume responsibilities of no interest to the fragment. These responsibilities are taken on for various, seemingly noble, reasons, but the Martyr eventually begins to realize he is overwhelmed or uninterested. As the responsibilities unfold, the Martyr reassures himself that “things are under control” or that he will eventually deal with the responsibilities or situation. When asked if events are under control, he becomes defensive or offended at the implications. Meanwhile, responsibilities continue to go unmet, actions taken are inaccurate and miscalculated because of lack of real motivation, and the Martyr begins to formulate more defenses. When the truth surfaces that nothing valid or expected was accomplished, the Martyr states that “I didn’t mean to have this happen!”, or “SEE? I tried and failed!” or “I guess I messed EVERYTHING UP then!” This defense has the potential to send others into a state of reassurance of the Martyr, telling him, “no, you did just fine” while the Martyr is secretly relieved from the expectations he volunteered upon himself.

Another simple example is a parent or spouse who speaks of “failing the family” or relationship, and moving others to relieve him or her.

In general, Martyrdom Guilt is used to generate pressured and false consolation so as to avoid recognition that responsibility is being avoided. It can also be used to evade the acceptance and responsibility of the very real changes to the life path, based on the results of previous choices. Martyrdom Guilt can also be used to amplify what little the Martyr has actually done, inducing Guilt from others if they express disappointment, making them painfully aware of “All he’s done for you”.

These are simplified and general examples, but we believe these to be clear enough.

[Sharon] My questions regarding guilt and the guilt channeling have to do with trying to understand more of this Michael Terminology, the overleaf system, and how to foil the good ole CF in the first place, by understanding when I am in a negative pole of a “leaf” or just doing a Chief Feature.

[Michael_Entity]: It is safe to assume yourself as False Personality (in negative poles) when you feel distinctly afraid, reactive, defensive, or any factor that creates a space between yourself and your life or another person. It is safe to assume yourself as True Personality (in positive poles) when you are in awe, asking for help, feeling connected to your life and others of your choice, and feeling safe.

Though we would need to spend more time on this topic to fulfill it, we can say a couple of things here.

ALL Overleaves sent to the Negative Pole were sent there through the Chief Feature. Your PRIMARY Chief Feature blocks your Goal, whereas your SECONDARY Chief Feature blocks your Mode. The Primary is experienced personally and creates ineffectiveness of the life force used for personal endeavors, related to the Goal. The Secondary is felt as the block between yourself and another, in relationships and intimacy.

The Overleaf most effective in dismantling the Chief Feature is the ATTITUDE. Focusing entirely on your Attitude, moving to the Positive Pole, removes all influence from Chief Feature. We realize this is briefly addressed here, but it is a picture that may bring some realization and understanding for now.

[Kim] Michael discussed how guilt could manifest through CF’s. I was wondering what about other Overleaves? Because I see how guilt can be related to some of my other Overleaves as well. Does anyone else see how guilt relates to his or her other Overleaves?

[Michael_Entity]: The other Overleaves are merely extensions of the Chief Features when they are in the Negative Poles. Chief Features are “not real” without the expression through a vehicle, the Negative Poles of a Personality. Though you may find some correlations in the Overleaves as related to Guilt, it is not as consistent as directly addressing the Chief Features and the tool of Guilt as it relates to them. For instance, a person in Impatience can have a Goal of Acceptance or a Goal of Growth, and it will still be Impatience that sends either Goal to the Negative Pole when in Guilt.