Kate Long, one of the Australian students of Klaus Ferdinand Hempfling’s one-year schooling course has responded to my reply to the remaining one-year students’ letter (see my post entitled Reply to Hempfling’s One-year Students) in this public forum. It is a reply which seeks to open channels of communication and which raises important issues concerning the relationship between people and self-proclaimed horse gurus in their quest to become a human whom a horse seeks to be with. Because I feel that this debate goes to the essence of some of the concerns which this blog seeks to address, I have decided to deal with Kate’s letter in the form of a separate post.
Kate’s letter
Andrew,
It is interesting, and accurate that you term Klaus a master.
It is a word that I was most nervous of at the start of my schooling.
The word did conjure up for me an assumed loss of individuality,
I pictured that I would have to go against myself in order to carry out someone else’s wishes.
The common consensus with the One Year students was that I had lightning bolts coming out of my forehead toward Klaus when he was teaching in those first three months.
I was, then, a classic product of modern society.
In this day and age there is little room for (and quite a lot of fear of) the ancient structure of master and pupil as one did find so common in traditional times.
Masters were sought and honoured in music, martial arts, war, horsemanship, calligraphy etc.
If one did find the right master, who could prove himself trustworthy, it was natural, and understood as necessary, to honour the masters guidance.
Nowadays with society so focused on the ‘individual right’ not the community or collective, there is a rapid fear around the idea of master and pupil.
The fear is so strong in some it is but a small jump in their minds to call this structure of master/pupil cult related.
Klaus never told me to cut it out with the lightning bolts in those early days…he always said to question everything.
Never disengaged your own mind.
If one is to serve another, horse, human, nature, child…anything…it must be done without relinquishing yourself.
In our western society it is considered the individual’s right to have his opinion.
In Klaus’s school we are taught it is our duty.
Before every class begins, Klaus always asks…’does everyone agree? Does anyone not agree?’
As we are training authenticity and sensitivity, we train to increase the awareness of our inner sensations and of course these cannot exclude our opinions!
If we were to be mere puppets in Klaus’s school, and mutely follow his word, we would be refusing the first major step toward authenticity.
It would be like someone wanting to learn how to fly but refusing to get in an aeroplane!
What is authenticity if not the seamless expression from inner realm to outer form with nothing limiting, stagnating, negating, over rating, expectating (I know it is not a word but it brings me great pleasure to leave it there in honour of the delightful European English of the One Year School) or castrating the organic nature of the being.
In the early days of the schooling I did try to be a good student, (a common legacy of our society) and when I took this approach to the horses it was repelling!
I remember one sweet mare was very fast to stand on her hind legs because I was trying to be good….and Klaus calling from the sidelines….’stop trying to be good! Stop pretending! Ground yourself Kate. Be yourself!!
Thankfully those days of trying to be something other than myself in such a gross unconscious way are over.(the deepening of authenticity never over though, as my task and duty and delight in life continues.)
It is why I am so intensely grateful to have been a student of the One Year school.
(And threefold delighted that it took two years….)
To be authentic one has to strike out on a path where no one has been before.
It is simply not possible to walk in someone else’s shoes to get there.
Klaus has always said ‘You have to jump! Trust yourself and jump! Trust Life and jump!
It is the most valuable thing to day after day be offered the safety and encouragement to jump into your own waiting arms.
Such delicious simplicity, being yourself.
Trusting the Life that brings you to Life, animates you, breathes you.
It enjoys writing words like this….and then goes to bed.
Kate Long
KFH masterclass.
My reply
In that your letter appears to be a genuine attempt at communication, it is most welcome. In that it addresses issues which go to the heart of some of the concerns addressed by this blog and does so through this public forum, I have elected to deal with it in the form of this post.
It is true that I have referred to Klaus Ferdinand Hempfling as ‘master’ in my reply to the letter which you and the remaining one-year students addressed to me through this blog last month. You will recall that I did so in the context of the role which all of you assumed in that letter, namely, that of the loyal, unquestioning followers of the man whom you sought to defend in it. Within that context ‘master’ merely denotes a person – in that case Hempfling – to whom you and your fellow students have chosen to be allegiant.
‘Master’
You then continue with a discussion of a very different type of ‘master’, one modelled on the bygone concept of a person (usually a man) who is an expert in his chosen field of activity and who assumes the role of teacher and protector in relation to those in his charge while they are training with him. It is pertinent that you do so, for it is precisely the type of master that I had in mind in the open letter which I sent to Hempfling on 26 May 2011, a copy of which the majority of the then prospective one-year students received, including you. In that letter I wrote the following:
From the time when I first read your book, Die Botschaft der Pferde (The Way of the Horse – my version of the title and not a literal translation), several years ago, I have been aware that the relationship you seek between a teacher and student goes beyond what one finds in a modern classroom. As I understand it, the trust that you demand has more in common with that of the traditional European relationship between a master and his pupil, one that is complete in its commitment to teach and to learn. Essential to this compact between master and pupil is that the pupil must learn to walk through the darkness of the unknown trusting that his master will ultimately show him where to find the light. This is the trust that you refer to and you are right to do so.
You will note from that letter that I was already familiar with this notion of ‘master’ which you refer to. You will also note that I was readily prepared to accept and abide by it for the purposes of Hempfling’s one-year school. Not only did I not fear it, I actually embraced it! It should therefore come as no surprise to you that my familiarity with this concept of ‘master’ enables me to avoid any confusion between it and the role assumed by a cult leader. You may therefore safely assume that I am quite capable of drawing a clear distinction between the two.
Just (fair) and trustworthy
So just what is this distinction in relation to trust? In your letter to me you cite a quality which you deem to be a prerequisite for it to be ‘natural and understood as necessary to honour the master’s guidance’. The quality that you refer to is trustworthiness. As you yourself put it, ‘it was natural and understood to be necessary to honour the guidance of a master’, if one could find the right one ‘who could prove himself trustworthy’ (your words). To this extent I would concur with you but I would suggest that trustworthiness is but one of the qualities required in such a ‘master’. The other is that such a ‘master’ must be just, that is, fair in his dealings with his students. As I put it in my open letter to Hempfling of 26 May 2011:
There is another aspect to this compact between master and pupil which seems to have been neglected and it is this. The trust that the pupil needs to have in his master can only survive if it is based on justice. The traditional European relationship between a master and his pupil was based on the assumption that a master, however harsh, demanding or incomprehensible (to his pupil) his actions may be at any time, will always treat his pupil justly. A pupil was and is entitled to expect this. Justice is the rock on which the pupil’s trust in his master stands tall. Without it, trust crumbles like dust into the quicksands of injustice…. If you want the trust of a pupil, do you not need to commit to the justice which makes a master precisely that: just and trustworthy?
The man to whom you ascribe the quality of trustworthiness is indeed capable of being just and trustworthy in his dealings with horses and humans, as we all are. I know this to be true in the case of some horses, as I have recognised it clearly in some of his videos and have recently given a presentation at the Corroboree Equus in Australia which dealt with this.
Yet I must also confess that I have personally experienced a distinct failure on the part of the man whom you describe as such a ‘master’ to be just and trustworthy in his dealings me. Some of the ways in which this has occurred are described or alluded to in this blog, as is his betrayal of the trust placed in him by Vicki. She attended three courses with your ‘master’’, and together with me co-hosted two body awareness weekends for his then sole senior body awareness coach and your fellow one-year student, Jo Ross, in our home – one of which you attended yourself – and gave up almost everything to attend his one-year school with you and the others. Since then I have met a growing number of people who have worked and/or studied with your ‘master’ – as his student and/or assistant – who sincerely believe – rightly or wrongly – that they have good grounds to conclude that he was not just or trustworthy in his dealings with them. They include two of your former fellow one-year students.
At this point let me state unequivocally that it is not my intention to judge Klaus Ferdinand Hempfling or blacken his name. The man who looks back at him in the mirror every morning is quite capable of doing this without any assistance from me or anyone else. More to the point, whether he does so or not is his responsibility and not mine. I admire him for his commitment to rediscovering his authenticity and to battling his demons. It is a daily struggle – but hopefully a joyful one – with which I can identify. Rather, I seek to highlight the qualities of being just and trustworthy, for they are a sine qua non – without which nothing – in our relations with horses and humans.
Authentic self
In your letter you go on to describe the process of embracing one’s authenticity in terms with which I can wholly concur: ‘to be authentic one has to strike out on a path where no one has been before’, ‘to jump into your own waiting arms’ and ‘trusting the life that brings you to life’. Amen!
Building a community of authentic selves (six of these people have attended Hempfling courses)
And yet I note that, even after describing this process of personal rediscovery in such uplifting terms, you close your letter by defining yourself not simply as Kate Long, the authentic being whom you claim to have become, but instead in terms of someone else (‘KFH’) and that person’s training programme (‘masterclass’). Given that you are a native speaker of English, it is also striking to see that your choice of paragraph structure, a fair amount of the language and/or some of the punctuation resembles that employed by your ‘master’ – a German for whom English is a second language – in some of his emails to me. As I look at this, I also note your decision to eschew the use of a courteous salutation and close in your letter to me. In addition, I am conscious that you are also a signatory to the letter addressed to me by the remaining one-year students last month (see my post entitled Reply to Hempfling’s One-year Students).
Cody and Jasmijn
As I ponder this, the shadows of a horse and human cast a dark silhouette across my view, blocking out the light behind them. They are creatures who are familiar to you, for you shared space and time with them during your master’s one-year school. The horse is a young gelding called Cody (renamed ‘Jo-Jack’ by your master). The human is a young Belgian woman called Jasmijn.
Cody joined the one-year course as one of two equines belonging to your fellow one-year student, Karina (for more about Cody see my post entitled Breaking the Cycle of Chaos). He was a horse whom the human you refer to as ‘master’ failed to engage in dance. He was a horse whom at least one of your fellow students incomprehensibly came to fear, a horse who inexplicably came to be so dangerous that he could not be rehabilitated, not even by such a great horseman as your ‘master’. How was it possible for this placid creature, whom Vicki and I saw at Karina’s before he went to the one-year school, to become such a dangerous beast within just a few months? When Cody was condemned to his fate, did you, your ‘master’ or any of your fellow students just for a moment stop to ask yourselves whether you were not failing him by no longer being just (fair) and trustworthy in your relations with him?
Jasmijn was your fellow student for more than seven months. By all accounts she was also arguably the most proficient horse person amongst you students. When she presumably felt so much pressure being brought to bear on her that she felt the need to flee the one-year course, abandoning the dream for which she and her father had made such a major financial sacrifice, did you, your ‘master’ or any of your fellow students just for a moment stop to ask yourselves whether you were not failing Jasmijn by no longer being just and trustworthy in your relations with her?
Pattern of behaviour
I cannot answer these questions for you, nor do I seek to judge you in relation to them. What strikes me about these two examples, my own experience and that of the other people whom I have mentioned above is that a clear pattern of behaviour appears to be discernible. It would seem that if a horse or human is to receive treatment based on a just and trustworthy approach, they will need to submit unquestioningly to the will of your ‘master’, and the human will be required to refrain from any opinion or action which could contradict that will. It would appear that such treatment may be denied – and action may ensue – if this is not the case. You, the remaining seven one-your students, are testimony to this. You have shown yourselves to be such loyal and unquestioning followers of your ‘master’ that you are prepared to launch an attack on anyone against whom you believe you need to defend him, as is evident from your letter to me last month.
This pattern is also evident in the one-year course which you have just completed. Of the ten original students 30% dropped out, the three youngest students I might add. You are quite familiar with the attitude adopted towards them by your ‘master’ and do not need me to remind you of that, nor of his vilification of Vicki and myself with such frequency that I wonder how all of you managed to find time for that, when there were so many other more important issues requiring your attention.
Perhaps I am wrong…
Naturally, I may be entirely wrong. Perhaps next week or the week after I will discover a video on YouTube featuring your ‘master’ dancing with a resurrected Cody, a young horse with whom your master visibly empathises, whom he clearly empowers and towards whom he is evidently just and trustworthy. Better still, perhaps the video will feature Cody dancing with his human, Karina, the woman who originally took her young gelding to the master who dances with horses in order to learn to do just that, both horse and human empowered by him.
Perhaps next week or the week after I will also hear that none of the one-year students or their ‘master’ were involved in condemning Cody to his fate.
Perhaps next week or the week after I will hear that your master has publicly acknowledged the prowess of his former student, Jasmijn, and that he has decided to be just and trustworthy towards her and her father by agreeing to an amicable settlement with them, compensating them for the four and a half months of training which she missed and the dream which she abandoned. What pressure she must have felt under to even contemplate the prospect? How much more to act accordingly? Perhaps it would help if you were to ask your ‘master’ whether he promised Jasmijn and her father an amicable settlement and whether he actually lived up to that promise.
Perhaps next week or the week after I will hear that the remaining one-year students cross-checked the answers provided by their ‘master’ to these questions with the email correspondence received by Jasmijn and her father from him and his legal pit-bull in Germany. More importantly, perhaps I will hear that you and your six remaining fellow students will have evaluated your own role in relation to the pressure that Jasmijn must have felt.
Perhaps next week or the week after I will hear that all of you have had contact with Jasmijn and that you have reconciled any differences that you may have had with each other.
Perhaps next week or the week after I will hear that Cecile and your master’s Akedah school have apologised to Jasmijn for attempting to deny her the right to earn a living (see my post entitled Hempfling’s Student: Casting off the Master’s Shadow), because she does not hide the fact that she studied with your master for more than seven months (being the only one of his one-year students to feature training a horse in any of his YouTube videos and the only one of them to train with him while working with three different stallions). Perhaps I will also hear that they have given Jasmijn an undertaking that they will never do this to her again.
Perhaps next week or the week after I will rejoice to hear that all of this as occurred and that I have consequently got it all wrong. Perhaps….
Be yourself
While sitting here contemplating your letter, I think back to the Sunday afternoon when I drove you to the airport in Coffs Harbour, Australia. We were discussing the KFH body awareness weekend which you had just attended in our home in Bellingen. I remember mentioning that I found you to be exceptionally observant when looking at horses and that you appeared to be particularly sensitive to what they reveal about themselves. I sincerely hope that you have not lost this ability and that you are able to extend it to humans as well, including any ‘master’ who threatens to become more important in your dealings with horses and humans than your own internal guru.
Learning to observe based on Hempfling’s What Horses Reveal
The ‘Kate’ whom I hope I am addressing is not anyone’s student but first and foremost a woman who lives and acts in her own right as an independent and authentic human being, one who is also capable of empathising with and empowering the Codys and Jasmijns of the world. If this is the ‘Kate’ whom I am writing to, I salute you and wish you the very best in everything you do. If you are not that ‘Kate’, I do so anyway and pray that you will someday find the ‘Kate’ that is you.
Be well and take care!
Andrew
Hello Andrew
I asked the horses about this “issue” that has occupied a great amount of your time and energy over the past year or so and they said, “Ahhh, humans”
I ask you, how has this minute and detailed forensic examination of KFH, his one year school program, his students, his dropouts and his relationship with various horses affected, or influenced your relationship with the horse, a creature that is exemplified by living in the NOW?
Another teacher said, “What you resist, persists”. By giving this “issue” attention, you are giving it power; the power to have an effect and influence on your life – and your relationship with the creature you have chosen to be your mentor and guide to a simple life. Is this what you are really seeking? Are you taking the direct path?
In his book “Stillness”, Eckhart Tolle says much about this type of situation. A very good read (and we picked it up in an Op Shop of all places!)
But taking a leaf from the pages of the book Horse, living in the moment, making the important things important and the unimportant things unimportant, and letting go lest one gets a learn burn might be some things to consider.
Happy travels and thanks for dropping by?
Glenn
Dear Glenn
The answer to your first question is an unequivocal ‘yes’. Our learning can provide us with part of the basis required for conscious living.
If I understand them correctly and a close examination of their writings would appear to support this, commentators such as Eckhart Tolle and Michael Bevilacqua do not state or suggest that the devotion of attention to an issue gives it power. Rather, they argue that the negative aspects of an issue can be fed by either dealing with them inappropriately or ignoring them. As I understand it, the first step is to accept any negative aspect of an issue for what it is. The second is to deal with it appropriately within the context of the approach which they advocate. I try and do this in my own small way (sometimes not always successfully, I might add).
Please also see my reply to Leanna on this page.
A big thank you to you and Kelly for sharing your home and horses with us. It was magic.
Be well and take care!
Hello Andrew
I hope your travels are going well and the adventures are wonderful.
Regarding giving power to an issue, I’m not sure that Mr Tolle and Mr Bevilacqua are definitive authorities by virtue of their written and published words.
I think if ‘thought’ is energy and one thinks about the ‘news’ and one has an emotional or intellectual response to that news, be it positive or negative, then the ‘news’ has been given power (energy) merely by our/your thought. Multiply a similar situation by a hundred thousand or a couple of million responses by viewers, readers or listeners all over the world and the ‘news does get some power.
Or if we do as some masters suggest and get in a state of just observance – without emotion, response or reaction, and without judgement, then the situation just “is”. Kinda like a child having a tantrum in the supermarket and people surrounding or near that child just accept that the tantrum is taking place, but they go about their day (and shopping), pretty soon the tantrum runs out of puff and life goes on. The issues of the child may then be dealt with by whoever is responsible.
Is that child’s issues anyone else’s issue? Not really. If the person responsible for the child doesn’t ask for help, is it helpful if someone steps in and ‘helps’?
At what point does another shopper become the child welfare advocate, the child psychologist or the judge and jury of the child’s carer?
Meanwhile the ‘enlightened’ shopper just gets on with the shopping and listens to classical music, not the news, on the way back to the horse paddock.
🙂
Glenn
Dear Glenn
I must confess that the notion of a disembodied issue having power is beyond my comprehension. Presumably, you mean that an issue may become more relevant or noticeable to people. In itself this is neither good nor bad and can be either depending on how urgent it is and/or how people deal with it. In this respect climate change is an issue in point.
As I understand it, a situation is always just as it is. Whether we ignore it or not and how we deal with it if we do no not, is what makes the difference. Personally, I would prefer a world of committed solidarity amongst humans than any aloof ‘enlightened’ individualism which is so easily capable of ignoring a child in distress or any other misfortune on the part of a fellow human being or any of the creatures with which we share this planet.
Enjoy your classical music on the way to the horses.
Be well!
Andrew
Ahhh Andrew
Again words are distracting us from the real meaning of Life. Again semantics and intellectual concepts are keeping us from the paddock where the horses live.
Again the discussion has been derailed, evaded and obscured by that which is not really relevant.
I have said it in the past and I’ll repeat it: Horses are not complicated creatures. Humans are though – and this is maybe where the problems and discord lies.
If we are to even get close to understanding horses, then we must avoid getting mired in complex thoughts, discussions and crusades.
The cop, judge and jury called America is winning no friends, nor getting to the heart of the matter with its behaviour.
My last words on this issue. I’m going to take MacGregor for a walk.
Smiles
Glenn
Dear Glenn
When the door to dialogue is closed so emphatically from such a dizzying height, there is not much more a lesser mortal such as myself can do than accept that closure for what it is and keep going.
Incidentally, I have some lovely video footage of you playing the wombat game with MacGregor. Something for YouTube perhaps?
Be well?
Andrew
Hello Andrew,
Isn’t it interesting, I absolutely see “disembodied issues” as having power – if an individual, or society, allow them to.
The way I see and understand it, is that every person naturally has an emotional reaction to something – joy, fear, anger, frustration, delight, etc, etc. All emotions create a certain energy resonance in the body (human and animal), and that energy is given off. This energy given off by individuals contributes to a couple of things, the three main ones being:
– How the individual sees and interprets things around them
– how others around them (human and animal) perceive and “feel” about that individual
– the planet’s general energetic vibration.
In turn the planet’s energetic field and vibration, and on a smaller scale being around a group of people (or a single person) has an influence on yourself and others. We all know that being around positive people “just makes us feel good”, in turn being around negative people has the opposite effect.
I wish I could remember a group who are doing scientific based studies about human energetic resonance on the world’s energy field. It is extremely interesting….ahhh, I remember “The Global Coherence Initiative”. http://www.glcoherence.org/about-us/about.html. Look it up, it is quite interesting. It was interesting that at the time of the 9/11 event, they worlds energetic field (measurable) spiked unexpectedly and inexplicably – they believe it was the collective world response to the event….but I side track.
By allowing a particular situation, individual or event to have an influence over our emotional response to it, means that that “Disembodied issue has power over us”.
By “letting it (the situation, individual or event) go” and not allowing that thing/person to provoke an emotion in us, that thing/person ceases to have influence over us.
The first step in this, if I have interpreted the likes of Eckart Tolle, etc correctly, is to acknowledge something is causing an emotional reaction in us, observe it, and allow it to pass. The second and more advanced step it to just observe. This is what we are striving for with our horses – not being drawn into the emotional reactions (especially anger) but to stay present in our centre and just allow the moment/s to occur.
Let me leave you with a story that I often comes to my mind in these sorts of conversations:
An old Cherokee told his grandson: “My son, there is a battle between two wolves inside us all. One is evil. It is anger, jealousy, greed, and resentment, inferiority, lies and ego. The other is good. It is joy, peace, love, hope, humility, kindness, empathy, and truth.”
The boy thought about it, and asked, “Grandfather, which wolf wins?”
The old man quietly replied, “The one you feed.”
What a shame we can’t still be sitting around the fire at Corroboree Equus having this conversation, it would make for a very interesting discussion…perhaps next year!
Cheers
Kelly ?
http://www.waterfallcreek.com.au
Dear Kelly
Your comments on the rise in energy are pertinent and express in part what I stated in the opening paragraph of my reply to Glenn.
I agree that ‘allowing a particular situation, individual or event to have an influence over our emotional response to it’, means that it can have ‘power over us’. However, the only alternative you envisage is to cease to allow a thing or person to provoke an emotion in us, and to observe it and allow it to pass.
There is a problem with this and it is this. Firstly, by failing to accept (that is, to do more than merely observe) a thing or person for what it is or they are, we turn our backs not only on good and evil alike but on life itself.
Secondly, you fail to acknowledge any other alternative response to such a thing or person. Your story of the Cherokee elder is a case in point. The story is quoted on p. 22 (PDF version) of Michael Bevilacqua’s book, Beyond the Dream Horse. Michael quotes this story to illustrate the point which he makes immediately afterwards:
We often try to ignore or suppress any negative feelings that we may have. Yet, we should try to understand those feelings and thoughts and accept them and deal with them. Allow the sum of our nature to bring forth something new and positive. Only then, can we develop, grow, and feel much freer.
And therein lies the alternative response. Instead of ‘allowing a particular situation, individual or event to have an influence over our emotional response to it’ (and instead of merely observing it aloofly and detached from life), we can acknowledge for what it is and determine our own response to it, one that is not emotional (and hence not influenced by that situation, individual or event) but which is ‘new and positive’. This allows us to draw a distinction between the good and evil wolves, and to feed only the good one. Adopting the approach that you suggest would require us to let the good wolf go as hungry as the evil one.
A discussion around the fire at the next Corroboree Equus sounds like a very good idea.
Be well!
Andrew
What a complex discussion.
I’ll reserve a spot by the fireside for continued conversation 🙂
Smiles
Kell
Sometimes for reasons beyond our human understanding the bad wolf needs to be fed as well……
Warmly
Geerteke
Dear Andrew, Please note that I truly wished my entry to be addressed to ‘Dear All’ … <3
Take care
Geerteke
Last question mark should have been an exclamation mark!!
PROMISE TO CODY (JOJACK)
Dear Andrew,
I have wrestled with my conscience on whether I should write this email and allow it to be published – but over the last few days, during my meditation, it has become increasingly apparent that I need to say something. I made a promise to Cody (JoJack) and I need to honour that. If it is not appropriate please delete it.
The recent discussion on your blog has prompted this I think.
So let me start at the beginning…
Some background – I first attended a KFH compact schooling in 2010 and returned for compact schooling 2 later on that year. I was so inspired by what I had seen and eagerly looked forward to when I would be ready to truly be with a horse. I then returned the following year to attend 1, 2 and 3 over a period of 10 weeks.
Some personal background: While my time as a horse owner has been roughly ten years – I still think of myself as a relative newcomer to the world of horses – even though I learnt to ride at the age of nine.
Also, approximately 15 years ago I started to notice an increase in my psychic ability – and then around 8 years ago I started ‘hearing’ the horses – this ‘just happened’ – and since then I have heard many stories, talked to many horses and heard how they view the world…
Now you may or may not believe this – and that is fine – but I needed to add that so I could relate the story of my Promise to Cody.
During my ten week stay on Lyo, I was able to experience a longer period of ‘teaching’. The Compact schooling 1 was again wonderful, inspiring etc. – and I could easily dismiss the times I witnessed irrational behaviour from KFH – as every brilliant teacher is allowed
their little idiosyncrasies. And at that time I figured that if he was getting amazing results with the horses – well, it was all good!
During compact schooling 2 and 3, however, I noticed something had changed. One – of course – was that I was the focus of some of that irrational behaviour – I won’t go into details here though as it is not appropriate. During this time, KFH worked with Cody – but it seemed to be one step forward, two steps back.
This horse was certainly ‘difficult’ it seemed! But I knew this horse was trying to show me something – or rather show all of us something. One day in particular all the horses were very agitated.
That evening, I tuned into Cody — in my communication with him, he said he had put himself forward to ‘take the bullet’. I was shocked – did he mean literally ‘take the bullet’? He had to wake people up to what the reality was here! he said.
Not long after that Klaus stopped working with him (during the time period I was there)…. but that horse had done his job. He had shown me the one thing that I hadn’t seen before. Not all was as it previously appeared with the relationship with the horses. And I will be eternally grateful to him for allowing me to truly see that.
The ‘spell’ I had been under had been broken – I questioned more – researched more – and was able to come away with different view – a better view – for good horse/human relationships are within reach of all of us – not just a chosen few.
Thankyou Cody (JoJack) – you will forever be in my heart. xx
Best wishes,
Heather
Dear Heather
Cody has been instrumental in helping a number of people realise that perfection cannot be claimed or assigned with the aid of smoke and mirrors.
Ultimately, all of us humans are fallible. According the status of infallibility to any self-proclaimed guru is not going to help them or ourselves. On the contrary….
Watching you interact with your horses during our recent visit was very special. Thank you for sharing.
Take care!
Andrew
Hail to ‘good horse/human relationships’…
Reading along…
Salutations all round
Ian
Dear Ian
Salutations reciprocated.
Be well!
Andrew
Hello again Andrew,
I trust you and Vicki are still enjoying your adventures in Oz & N.Z.
As usual I havn’t a lot to say apart from the fact that, I totally agree with Glenn.
It was great to see you both,
Hugs,
Peggy.
Dear Peggy
Thank you for sharing your home and horses with us during our recent visit. Experiences like this really made it a most enjoyable trip.
To the extent that you agree with Glenn, perhaps you may wish to read my response to his words. Please also see my reply to Leanna on this page.
Hugs and thanks to you and your mob.
Take care!
Andrew
Andrew,
I have been stopping by and reading your blog for quite a long time now and I feel that I must speak up. First I want to say that I have gained so much reading more about those you have referred to in your writing. I have been able to take internet exotic journeys to foreign lands and meet through your and their writing amazing human and mostly humane beings. I have posted their chosen quotes on my walls, pondered their thoughts and personal equine/emotional growth travels. It has been a very rich experience for me and even more so since my life has been working its way through a painful transition about someone I care(d) deeply for that has or was not the depth and quality of person I thought I knew them to be. I have become very close to those who correspond with you on a more regular basis, I truly believe that they have beautiful souls as mirrored by or directed from the horses they share their lives with. I agree with many of your assessments of human character. But here is what I want to say to you Andrew,
today…Your major subject is too often the very same question of who is KFH discussed in a different but similar to me variation over and over. We can all get stuck and when is it time to complete the “ticket writing” and move on? And no I have never done this myself! Have you heard of the book: Forgive for Good? It was written by Dr. Fred Luskin who is or was on Staff at Stanford University Calif. USA. The principles of the book in action make up a Program called The Forgiveness Project which was tested in Northern Ireland to see if they(the program creators/facilitators) could demonstrate validity for the program under extreme circumstances using the method to hopefully aid in some kind of positive recovery to victims from both sides of the conflict who had lost family members due to the violence of the civil war. Its just a thought of mine please don’t take it wrong. This is your blog and your journey, I am personally much richer for it. I do want to say that as much as I have devoured KFH’s books I have always right from the beginning felt a dark side somewhere in there as well. Some might say that it is just a part of the personality patterns of visionaries. It might even come with the territory of revelation or groundbreaking that somehow opens the rest of us up to new patterns of thought and possibilities, but that they the visionary themselves are some how burdened or infected with individual significant flaws or challenges of their own. Why is it that these “ground breakers” or “guru’s” so often find themselves in friendship breaking conflicts or not uncommonly are discovered at some point or points for some shortcoming that threatens their very message and can and in many cases does destroy or reduce them usually with great humiliation and/or profound lessons learned again all along the way of spreading these beautiful revelations that we find strongly awaken and brighten our thoughts and magically lift us to higher levels of conscious thought , better more balanced views and the ability to take that knowledge and awareness and shift ourselves to a greater level of right action. I met a Tibetan monk like this once as well, I didn’t like him much as a person, could feel some negative energy from him, but I still learned from his teachings. Maybe the message is the same as Tolstoy’s story. Tolstoy never lived his revelations in a truly pure sense, but in his personal writings a lot can be learned if one is patient enough to plow though text moving much slower than that of his novels. I do wish I had even part of the
grasp of your and Ians grammer but I may reach that point someday.
I don’t know why this is all over the place on the page,(if you choose to keep it it may need to be fixed) but I hope my message is useful or at least worth a little consideration. As for me I am working on living the words so beautifully written in quotes by Eden. Thank you for expanding my world with such beautiful wise and inspiring friends, companions, caregivers and students of the horse. I didn’t even mention the reading I have done from your inspiring sources such as…Beyond the Dream Horse by Michel Bevilacqua. This is a road of no return we will never be those “other” horse people again even if we ever were.
A rare poem that came to me…
Live the Dream of Your Horse…
Be Still,
Quiet,
and…
Listen to His Silent Words.
Most sincerely,
Leanna
Dear Leanna
There is much that you say which you put into words better than I can. For this I thank you.
With regard to Hempfling, he has personally done what was required to make his peace with me and, as such, there is nothing for which he requires my forgiveness. I am not stuck on Hempfling. Instead, I choose to continue to learn from him, as I do from others (whom, curiously, no one has even thought to suggest I am stuck on or should abandon). What I have learned and continue to learn from and in spite of him is mentioned at length in this blog, as is the explanation for why I feel that I can identify with him more readily than with any other well-known horse person. This is a well-informed, conscious choice and one which I sincerely hope others will come not only to accept but also to respect.
It is true that I sometimes deal with negative aspects of issues in relation to Hempfling. Please see my reply to Glen on this page for pertinent information in this respect.
In addition, there are some people who feel – rightly or wrongly – that they have been harmed by Hempfling. Within a few hours of publishing this post, I received a private email from one such person here in Europe. She writes: ‘when you reply you take each point, and make your counterarguments, which are all logical and hard to deny. It helps. Oh, how it helps.’ The reason she gives for this is that she is tempted to doubt her own experience. Being reminded of the facts helps her to accept them for what they are and by doing so to continue to ‘gather’ herself again.
I shall listen to Pip again today.
Be well!
Andrew
Hello Andrew,
Thanks for the opportunity you give us to get an insight into the “natural horsemanship” world.
In this horse whisperer, natural horsemanship niche, certain people are more known and therefore more influential than others. We need some level of insight to be able to decide which method is suitable for our own situations and relationships with our horse(s). These insights don’t come from publicity campaigns. They come from communication with people who have been on the inside and experienced what happens after entering the training.
The behind the scenes details you give are very relevant, as are the comments from people who have experienced the training programmes at the KFH academy. The students’ letters you published on this blog are also serious warning signs that all is not as it seems from the publicity videos. The lack of self awareness from the students is unsettling.
If we compare the influence some of these horse behaviour experts have, then we see that
Hempfling has a lot of influence and enjoys widespread authority.
Compare his YouTube video, “When the Horse Seeks Us” with 1,911,875 views,
And
Chuck Mintzlaff’s video, “Part I. Friendship Training Introduction” with 3,306 views.
Hempfling’s method is quicker than Mintzlaff’s, but the risk of damaging a horse is greater.
There are, as I see it, three flaws in Hempfling’s paradigm:
The alpha male concept
Dominance
Asserting oneself in minutes.
The alpha male idea comes from an old study of North American timber wolves. This cannot be applied to other species, not even other wolves, as the European wolf is more social than the timber wolf. Nor do dogs act in this way, they follow a leader, but not in the timber wolf fashion.
Dominance is not appreciated in a horse herd. The dominant individual is avoided, and not accepted as a leader. As Carolyn Resnick points out, a dominant stallion must learn to be a leader or he will lose his mares. Horses choose their leaders; they are not bullied into accepting dominance. Mark Rashid also writes something similar.
Asserting oneself in minutes is not bonding or building a relationship. But a relationship can be built over time after the initial assertiveness, if that is accepted by the horse.
Why does KFH not succeed with all horses? Is that he does not get into the horse’s soul? If we adopt a child from an orphanage, that child might take years to break out of its defensive shell and start trusting. We can’t dominate the distrustful child out of its shell; we need to nurture it with empathy and care until the child breaks the shell itself. Why should a horse that has suffered abuse and lost trust in humans be any different?
There are many ways of seeing a horse’s personality: horsenality (Perellis), horsonality (Andy Beck), Caroline Resnick’s 3 types (leader, follower and dominant), and Hempfling’s 26 types. These are all great if we have a confident social horse, but what if our horse lacks trust and is frightened of humans?
Why is a horse difficult, or behaves badly? Is it the horse’s horsenality, aggression, dominance, fear, or just a plain lack of good manners?
Horses are complex living creatures and treating a frightened and anxious horse in the same way as we would treat a spoiled brat could be disastrous.
If I had a frightened horse, distrustful of humans, I would definitely not try and assert my dominance on that horse. Chuck Mintzlaff’s Friendship Training would be a better way to go.
Horses choose their leaders, while avoiding dominant individuals. Dominant individuals do not lead. This is a major issue if we are to have a good relationship with our horse. Since horses choose their leaders, does dominance and asserting one’s leadership help or hinder forming a deeper relationship? This probably depends on the horse and not the human.
I have a horse, Sancho, who initially had no respect for my space. He was a spoiled brat. He cracked one of my ribs by pushing me against a pole as if I didn’t exist. I tried asserting myself, but had to keep being aware that I had to assert myself or we would be back to the start. Finally I found the best method with him was to ignore him. I went into his field and picked weeds or scythed. I treated him as if he didn’t exist. It took some time, but eventually he wanted to have contact with me. He sought me and I did nothing except ignoring him. No secret tricks, no picaderos, no round pens. Now we are buddies and he respects my space.
So for me and my two horses, Chuck Mintzlaff’s and Carolyn Resnick’s paradigms resonate well, but I feel following the KFH way would not be right for us.
Thanks again for the insights and thank you commentators for your valuable insights.
May you all find the right way with your horse(s),
Vic
Dear Vic
Thank you for sharing your keen insight into some of the issues explored in this blog.
If there is one thing that I have learned from Hempfling, it is that he does not primarily present us with an approach or method for interacting with horses, as Chuck Mintzlaff and Carolyn Resnick do, or no longer does so at present (the lack of a coherent methodology in his most recent book is evidence of this).
Rather, despite the dream of horse-human interaction which he employs for marketing purposes, his primary educational interest currently appears to lie in helping people become the kind of human a horse seeks to be with. The purpose of his marketing endeavours is to convince them that they can only achieve this by attending his school in Denmark. Having said this, there is an essential truth to his primary educational interest. Self-development is arguably something which most horse owners or carers are reluctant to embrace as an essential step on the route to mutually beneficial horse-human interaction, although it is probably what they require most. To this extent, I believe that Hempfling’s approach is highly relevant.
This I try and highlight through this blog, while suggesting alternatives to Hempfling’s school to achieve such self-development for those who choose not to attend it or cannot afford to do so.
All the best to you and yours.
Be well!
Andrew
Thank you Andrew,
This short reply has clarified the confusion I felt that caused me to let Hempfling’s books gather dust.
I lost the trust I initially had when I purchased his books, but now I finally have a context in which to understand his advice. Context is vital in communication.
His “domination – trust” base turned me away. I feel domination and trust are mutually exclusive. Geerteke mentioned that the energy that flows from him is not dominance. I have not seen him in person, and don’t have Geerteke’s energy vision, so I followed the written words as defined in the Oxford Dictionary, hence my confusion.
Maybe confident assurance would be a better way to describe what Hempfling really means?
Regards,
Vic
Geerteke what is the relationship between money and energy?
Heather what else are you so afraid to speak of?
Jasmijn why the silence?
Klaus I wonder what the horses who can not be reached have to teach us?
Glenn wise words.
What is to be gained from flinging accusations at one another?
Use your energy to dig deep and look wide.
Dear Elizabeth – thank you for your intriguing question(s) – for the sake of the interaction and not me just giving you an answer to the question addressed to me – an answer that you might or might not resonate with – I would very much like to ask you a question in return as you have the wisdom deep inside to know the answer already and what is more beautiful and inspiring than to (re)discover your wisdom yourself …
What is your definition of ‘energy’ and what is your definition of ‘money’?
@@Use your energy to dig deep and look wide.@@ ……if this is yours then I fully trust your ability to find an answer !
Take care and be well
Geerteke
Hi Elizabeth,
You asked what else am I so afraid to speak of. I do not think I am afraid as such – I just do not think I need to go into detail of other ‘incidents’ here on this blog – many others I have spoken to privately know the details.
I guess now you have me thinking – is it – as you say – flinging accusations at each other – or is there a sense of duty to expose what is really going on there – in order to protect other people and horses? This – I do not know…
Perhaps there is a moral dilemma going on in my mind…
Best wishes,
Heather
Dear Elizabeth
Thank you for your wise words.
Be well!
Andrew
Dear Andrew
I have recently been asked to read your blog. You are certainly on an interesting journey of self discovery, it is very intriquing to read about.
I offer an observation to ‘both sides’. I truly believe and experience that when you have an emotional reaction to something someone says/does that you need to look deeper in yourself to try to find what needs healing in you. Maybe you are projecting your stuff onto that person or reflecting one another. However if that stuff has nothing to do with you, you will not have an emotional reaction. It will be like water off a duck’s back. You might see clearly how the other person is, but it will not produce an emotional reaction from you.
Vic what you say about dominant horses would be my understanding too. However what you say about Klaus and dominance I don’t believe can be the entire truth. I think there may be a problem of translation from him with the word dominance. There are an awful lot of dominant horses out there. If what he was doing was truly dominating the horse then he would be failing with a great deal of horses. As far as I am aware Klaus has been actively seeking out problem horses, especially stallions most of his working life. Carolyn Resnick is not interested in problem horses. She only wishes to tweak horses that are basically ok. How many horses has Klaus actually failed with to date, and actually taking into account the type of horses he seeks out? Maybe the horses he is failing with are so mentally disturbed that even he can not heal them? Geereke was pointing out that the horses he has at this year’s academy are different from normal. Perhaps now this affects him so much that he decides to choose different horses today, not the ones with big problems?
Dear Caroline
It is flattering to hear that you have been asked to read this blog. It is humbling to know that you have taken the time to do so.
I am not sure that ‘both sides’ exist. The comments elicited by this blog appear to suggest that there is a multiplicity of viewpoints, most of which are open to dialogue and reflection.
Based on what has been written through this blog by all concerned, I would imagine that most, if not all, of us would be aware of your concerns regarding emotional responses.
With regard to your comments on Hempfling and dominance, I would like to draw your attention to the following points:
– Hempfling’s understanding of ‘dominance’ is set out in his writings, especially his book, Dancing with Horses;
– almost all that we know about Hempfling and the horses that he has helped, depends on the information that he chooses to release in this respect, information which is very tightly controlled;
– while the horses that he fails to help may be so mentally disturbed that even he cannot heal them, the story of Cody – see elsewhere on this page and in this blog – would seem to suggest that it could also be a case of horses being designated as so mentally disturbed, precisely because he is incapable of helping them;
– whatever the case, it is clear that Hempfling has a special gift and that its successful employment largely depends on the spiritual and physical self-development which he has experienced.
Be well!
Andrew
Dear Fellow Readers of this Blog
Given we have discussed so much of Klaus’s work and thinking, perhaps you’d like to take note of the following:
“Talking of calls, just a quick reminder the closing date for question for our upcoming Special HC Call with Klaus Ferdinand Hempfling is this Friday 1st November. Go here to ask your question and register to receive call details: http://horseconscious.com/kfhqhc.html
The actual call is titled “The Safe & Pain Free Horse – What Does This Mean For Your Life?” and is on Sunday 10th November at 10am Pacific / 1pm Eastern / 6pm UK / 7pm Central Europe.”
This seems an ideal opportunity to clear up any doubts that may have arisen.
Best wishes
Ian
Dear Andrew
I do not always find you very clear. But I do admire your courage and curiosity on
your journey. You may have heard of the horse boy. A boy born to intelligent parents who they find gets increasingly difficult to look after. They find he has autism. Did his parents cause his autism? I do not know whether this has anything to do with Cody’s story, as I do not find this horse’s story clearly laid out in your blog. It is just something that comes to my mind. But perhaps you know more actual facts then I find in your blog about this horse.
Good luck to you.
with best wishes
Caroline