 Good morning, everyone. We'll get started with our mentoring for today. A warm welcome to all of you who have joined in. So today we will be having Jean who will be speaking to us on interpersonal conflicts and after that we can present our questions on this topic or any other topic that you have in mind. You know, anything to do with ministry, anything to do with the classes that we have been covering. So right now over to Jean, who will give us a short talk on interpersonal conflicts. Thank you. Jean, if you please take over. Yes. Sure. Thank you. Thank you, Deepika. It's a joy to be here. I apologize. There is something wrong with my system and my video is not playing. I think there's some technical glitch. I hope you all can hear me. I sincerely apologize that I'm not able to show my face because there is an issue here. Deepika, are you able to hear me? Very loud and clear. Yes. Okay. Great. Great. Okay. So yeah, so warm welcome to all of you. We're going to just take a couple of minutes just to really look at interpersonal conflicts and I'm sure y'all would agree with me that it's something that happens very often. You know, we don't like to talk about it and it's not almost the most fun to deal with, but yes, it's a fact of life. So conflict is important for the learning and our growth process. That is if it is resolved healthily. So it's something I guess y'all would agree with me is that often we learn as children that everyone should get along and when conflict naturally arises, we think that there's something wrong with us that we're not getting along with the other person. Another important factor to keep in mind is we are never taught tools for really recognizing and managing conflict, let alone, you know, how productively we may disagree or work our way through that conflict. Now, this is why it's so essential that we offer these tools to ourselves to help us really manage our interpersonal conflict. Okay. So to start with, I want to bring forth a question to you. How do you typically attempt to resolve interpersonal conflicts? Do you openly communicate with the other person who you're having a conflict with? Do you seek mediation? I mean, someone has to come in between to mediate between you and the other person. Are you very quick to apologize and forgive without really discussing the matter or do you avoid conflict in all, you know, its entirety? Or are you very assertive that you know, you ensure that you get your way done? And what I'd want to just present to you is something a little researched and something that is used very commonly in organizations and, and, you know, in in centers where there are understanding of conflict. So it's a pair of researchers by the Thomas and Kilman in 1974, they studied workers and their routine conflicts in the workplace. Now over time, they were able to observe a pattern of ways in which people generally resolved conflicts. And most methods can be bought down to these five core methods. These five options actually forms the basis of the Thomas Kilman conflict resolution model. Now these five conflict resolution styles are described by the by the by the this instrument as positioned along a spectrum. There are two spectrums over here, you would notice there is assertiveness on the x axis that is on the vertical one and cooperativeness on the horizontal one. So just quickly to just share with you cooperativeness refers to the extent to which as a person you may try to understand and satisfy the other person's concerns. Okay, so it's a it's your willingness to cooperate with others, consider their needs and work towards mutually beneficial solutions when you're in a conflict situation or it ranges from being uncooperative to being cooperative. The assertiveness aspect of it is refers to the extent to which you seek to satisfy your own concerns. That is where you're willing to assert your own needs, desires or viewpoints in a certain situation and it ranges from low from being unassertive to being highly assertive. Okay, so when if you were to look at this classification, there are five best competing, best collaborating, compromising, avoiding and accommodating. So I'll quickly just go through this and I'm going to help you with an instrument that you can try for yourself to really see what kind of style you are in. So just to quickly explain this, the competing style is characterized by a person who pursues their own concerns at the expense of others. And often it involves a win-lose mentality. So when the person tries to win and get his or her way, they get their way, even if it means the other person loses. It's like saying, you know, I'm right and you're wrong. That's what competing means. The next one is collaborating. Here, the people seek to find solutions that satisfy both their own needs as well as the needs of the others. So this aims for a win-win outcome. Here you're working together with the other person to find a solution that works best for you as well as for the other. It's saying, it's like saying, come, let's figure this out together. Okay, the third one is the compromising one. This is where individuals who use this style are willing to make concessions and seek solutions that are midway or what they call is a middle ground. This is when both of you give up a little here and there to meet in the middle. Okay, it's like, you know, let's attempt to do this. I give up some, you give up some. That's what it means. The next one is avoiding. Sometimes people just avoid the conflict or pretend it's not there. It's like saying, you know, I don't want to talk about it for now. This avoiding mode is characterized by people who sidesteps conflicts and ignore or minimize whatever the issues may be. And the last one is the accommodating one. This is where you tend to give in to concern and wishes of others. So you let the other person get what they want and you might give up your own needs. It's like saying, okay, I'll go along with your idea. Now, this model can actually help individuals or even couples really recognize their conflict resolution patterns and work towards better harmonious interactions. So what research suggests is that conflict resolution style has a big impact on the strength and the longevity of a relationship and that the kind of conflicts or the frequency of conflicts doesn't matter as much. In other words, it says how you fight matters more than how often you fight or what you really fight about. Okay, so what do we do with this information? So next time you're finding yourself in a situation where you recognize that you're avoiding or you're accommodating, you're competing, you're compromising or collaborating, you take a moment to pause and think about whether that's the mode that you want to use. If you really find yourself defaulting to a certain mode that isn't serving you well, it's important to actively choose another mode. I'm just going to put okay, I'm not able to type anything either. Alright, I'm sorry, I'm not able to type anything either, but there is what I probably do is I'll share it with Pastor Nancy and maybe it can go out alongside with the recording. There is a link where there is an adapted version of this instrument. It's not the standardized version because that's something that needs to be paid for, but then it's an adapted version. It's a free version that I will let Pastor Nancy know which can be sent for. Or Pastor Nancy, can I just send it to you on your WhatsApp and if you could just put that up on the, yeah, I'll just send it to you. So you can just go through this, I mean it's a set of 35 questions and it will kind of help you see what mode you generally use. To just understand and I think it's important for us, even as we figure out what kind of conflict styles we may have, just a quick highlight of certain biblical principles to resolve conflict. So the first and foremost thing is to be able to listen and as it's written in James 119, everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak, slow to become angry. So it's important not to interrupt each other when you're talking, especially in a conflict. In addition, let the other person finish speaking and begin your response by first recapping what they said so that you can confirm what you understood and then talk. So this is a principle we don't use very well. I mean, we're quick to really respond without listening and without sharing back or giving a feedback about what we have heard. The second one is to hold back judgment. Matthew 71 says, judge not. So it is when you're dealing with a conflict, treat it like a brainstorming session and not an argument. Each of you throw out your solutions after you've really spoken about your feelings and instead of judging the solution, focus on addressing the element of the plan that doesn't work and suggest alternatives. So come to a place where you're collaborating to really brainstorm an issue. The third one is be direct in addressing conflicts. Matthew 1815 says, if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. But that's the first step. And then yes, there are other steps. If you look in 16 and 17 verse 16, 17, 16 says, take someone else with you, 17 says, involve the church. So do that be direct in addressing conflicts rather than gossiping or rather than talking about the issue to others, addressing it helps. Fourth one is to seek reconciliation. Matthew 52324 says, if you bring your gift to the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, first to be reconciled to your brother and then come and offer your gift. So even when you're reconciling, remember that even when the Bible encourages reconciliation, it may not always guarantee that the other person will be willing to reconcile. In such cases, find peace in knowing that you have followed these principles in the best of your ability and you can trust in God to work in the heart of all those parties involved. And fifth, the most important thing is to be able to forgive. Matthew 614 and 15, but if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. If you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. Forgiveness is one of the crucial things in every relationship because it builds back, restores and helps to go forward. Yeah, this is a really brief, short one. I hope this was helpful. Thank you Deepika. I'll be open for any questions if they may have any. Thank you. Thank you so much for that talk. Yes, if anyone has any questions on this particular topic of interpersonal conflict, please go ahead with your questions. And then later, maybe we can address other questions that you may have to the faculty who are here. Please go ahead. It's an excellent topic and we all deal with the interpersonal conflicts almost on a weekly basis. So any questions that you would like to ask regarding this, please go ahead. If you find it difficult to unmute, you can always just type your question in the chat and we will address it. Hi, Pastor Deepika. Could I ask a question? Please go ahead. Yes. Thank you. Thank you, pastors for doing this. This is a very interesting topic. Pastor Jeanne or anyone I wanted to kind of check or just if you could talk a little bit about the role of emotions in conflict management, especially I think both in terms of say, as someone trying to resolve a conflict between two people. I often find myself in that situation where two people have had a conflict and I'm trying to kind of get them to reconcile. And often in that process, there's like emotions are very high and there's hurt. And so just kind of navigating around that is quite challenging. So any thoughts on managing emotions, navigating through difficult emotions in the process of conflict resolution? Thank you, Sam. That's an excellent question. And you can never separate emotions from conflict. Nevertheless, we understand and that that topic in itself of managing, regulating emotions in conflict is in itself a huge and a big topic. But I'll probably just address a couple of points. The first one is depending on the situation, depending on the people involved in the conflict, the emotions arise. For example, if you are having a conflict with an auto driver, your emotions are and I mean, they're kind of brief. If you're able to control and regulate yourself, you can actually just avoid a conflict and leave that and you can figure out how you regulate your emotions. But let's say if it is between a friend or if it's a spouse or if it's children, that's when emotions tend to take over. So something that in conflict management, the first and foremost thing that as a precursor to all of this is to be able to share emotions first and foremost. So when you are resolving a conflict, like I said, you can't separate it. So you may need to get to a place of sharing emotions, being willing to acknowledge, not dismiss, hear those emotions out, however hard it may be. And the issue sometimes is that people don't understand or they're not in a position to really work alongside with their emotions. So giving good time to just relate emotions before coming to this step process of problem solving, of strategizing or finding or brainstorming, all of that. Before that, it is to come to a place of saying, okay, let's just be able to talk our emotions out. So that in itself is, I say is a training to be able to one, address your emotions, to be able to have the other person acknowledge it. That is a huge training. We've never taught to acknowledge people's emotions. We especially, I think in our culture, we are taught to dismiss it and say, don't cry. Why are you feeling angry? It's okay. You don't have to feel so bad about it. All of this is dismissing. But to come within conflicts to say, I acknowledge that whatever you're feeling is what you're feeling. And I want to hear what you're feeling. I think that maybe is the first step that we can do it, that it's okay to express our emotions, but it needs to be constructive. It can't be in a way that hurts the other person by maybe your language you use or the abuse that may come about. That's something that may need to get protected. But to let people know in conflicts, it's okay to share these emotions. And once the emotions die down, we get into the rational part of it. We use the rational part of our brain to discuss these conflicts. I know it isn't a step-by-step process, Sam, but this is at large maybe one thing that we could do. I'll also leave it open for the other pastors to answer. Thank you so much, Jean. Anyone else wants to add to what Jean has already shared? Please go ahead. Sam, was that helpful or do you have any other follow-up questions? That was extremely helpful. It's also got me into thinking that the resolution may not be the solution like probably we have a disagreement about a task or a process or anything. But what Pastor Jean shared is getting me into thinking like just people being able to just express their emotions, not even agree, but just express their emotions could be a form of resolution itself. So I think that's a good clarity that I have. Thank you. Thank you, Pastor Jean. Thank you. So we have a question posted here. By Prince, when reconciling and trying to solve the conflict with a brother, friends are someone in the circle and if it is only getting heated up like if another person is not understanding, defending and provoking and it's only getting more complicated, what would we have to do? How can we deal in those situations and what are the steps we can take to avoid this kind of result when trying to resolve conflicts? So if one person involved in the conflict is provoking and causing the situation to become more intense, how can we intervene and how can we help? Jean, could you please help us with this question? Sure. Thank you, Deepika. Prince, I think I understood your question as if there are other friends also involved, are bought into this conflict resolution and how it gets heated up. I think that's what you meant. And I'm going back to the point that I bought about in Matthew 1815, which I said be direct in addressing conflicts. So especially if you do have a conflict with someone, it is important to deal with them directly first rather than getting people in. And I've seen this happen so often, especially in couples who are having issues. The larger family is bought in and then there are sides being taken, there is a lot more of mess that takes place because there are other people with billions in it. And also for example, if it's a husband, his parents come in and they are more looking at it from the husband side rather than at their daughter-in-law side. So as a principal, it is wonderful, it is great if we can follow that process as it is written in the Bible, be direct in addressing the problem. If you find that it isn't helping, I would say seek help from a third person, maybe a pastor, a counselor, someone who is not emotionally involved with you and then try and resolve conflicts. It's when you involve a friend or a family, they are as emotionally charged in this connection as you are. So as a process, be direct and if you've already involved other people in, maybe it's a good thing to tell them to keep away till you and the person, your partner or the person in question here are able to resolve that situation. Yeah, I think that throws a lot of clarity on the question being asked. Prince, you did mention here in the chat that you are thinking more about conflicts where two persons are just involved personally. Yeah, I think that was partially addressed in the first question which was posed. Anything else that Jeanne would like to add in the light of what he has shared further here, that he's thinking about a question specifically in terms of two people being involved personally. Okay, so if that is so, if you find that you're not able to really discuss a conflict with someone, then it's okay to bring in someone. Again, the choice of person really matters. If it is, like we said, if it's a friend or a family who may be as emotionally involved in this, you probably have someone who's taking your side, which means you're really not looking at resolving a conflict. You're really looking at someone to take your side and so there is two against one. Now that's not the point. The point of a conflict is to come in terms to understand how two of you can work together. So that's why when you choose a third person, be judicious in the person you choose. Someone who is maybe an outsider, who's a third person, who's probably wiser, who's in the world, who can help objectively help the two of you through that situation. Thank you. Is that helpful, Prince? Or do you have any other follow-up questions? If you have anything further to ask regarding this, okay, perfect. Yeah, thank you so much. Yes, we have another question which has been posted by Metro stars. This question is about interpersonal conflict based on religious backgrounds. So if there are two persons involved in a conflict and they are from different religious backgrounds and there's a religious issue at stake, the example that he has mentioned here is someone getting offended because someone else has spat carelessly during their fasting. How would we deal with that kind of a sensitive issue? Jeanne, if you could please address this question. Okay, I'll do my best. I think it's important. Now, your question specifically says a Christian versus a Muslim or a Hindu. Now, you know, being a Christian doesn't need to change if you are having a conflict with a Christian or with someone with a different faith. We are still called to be able to resolve our conflicts in the same way, whether they are people of our faith, people of a different faith. So I think I'd throw that question back, is how would you deal with someone who's a believer? Maybe they have, they've come from an understanding of some, maybe some superstition or something. So the first thing that you would do is to maybe listen to them to understand where they're coming from, not dismissing, not defending, but really listening to them and come to a place of apologizing for maybe hurting them as people. And you could bring in your intentions that you didn't mean to hurt them for them as people. And that maybe the respect that you showed was something that you would like to correct. So if there are to be in humility, even when we are addressing things that may not make too much of sense for us, like the example that you've put is to be humble and say, ask for forgiveness for something that you carelessly did without actually putting too much of thought with it. And maybe also sharing at that point of time that maybe in your faith or in your understanding, this is not looked at. And that's why you would have done something. So I wouldn't see it very different from dealing with again, another believer or someone who is a Christian, whether they're Muslim or Hindu, the same thing applies however you deal with them. Deepika, I'll open it back to the others if they'd like to add in. Yes, please. If anyone else would like to address this question from the faculty, please go ahead. Kennedy, has that been helpful or do you have any follow up questions? All right. I think that was helpful. Thank you. Anyone else would like to ask questions regarding interpersonal conflict specifically? If not, then maybe we could have other questions being brought in. But anyone else would like to address this particular issue? Just a quick question, Jejean. Jejean, in the personal conflicts, just wanted to understand, based on the intensity of the conflicts, could it be that obviously the objective of the whole exercise of sharing of emotions and etc being truthful and direct is to solve the issue. But could it be that it could be in different phases? At the first sitting, it could be just to bring an understanding, but nothing is resolved. To bring an understanding that to both the parties that there's something that needs to be resolved, could it be in phases? And if so, based on the intensity of the conflict, could you just explain to us that, okay, this could be a phase, this could be a phase. So we understand that, okay, this is a win. We've gone in for this. This is the objective. We've got that. Now we move on to the next thing. Thank you. Yeah, thank you, Pastor Jaikumar. So resolving conflicts definitely is a process. It's not exactly like what you said, Pastor Jaikumar, depending on the intensity. And if the intensity is greater, the time taken, the steps taken to it are very varied. So the first and foremost thing, and I think what we do even in counselling is first and foremost, when we meet two people together who have intense conflicts, we kind of draw about a certain objective or certain goals. What are we looking at doing? So they may say, yeah, we've come to resolve this conflict. Now that's a really, really broad goal. And we break it down and say, okay, if we were to do it stepwise, how would we like to do it? So one person may say, I really want to bring about my hurt and my anger. I want the other person to listen to it. So maybe it's then just, it's an initial phase of just sharing emotions. And that in itself is extremely intense. If it is an extremely intense one, it can go on for a period of time. Then you draw the second one. Okay, once we've done that, we're going to look at maybe resolving, breaking down the conflict into smaller parts. Now, let's suppose there is a husband and wife conflict over here. Now, there may be very, very many inroads to a certain conflict. So we piece that conflict out and say, okay, there are 10 issues, general issues that we have over here. What seems the smallest or the easiest one that we could probably talk about. And then we start there. Then we move into something what we call as fair fighting rules, which is, we have a certain guideline as to how you're going to resolve the conflict, whether you're in a session or whether you're at home, what are certain rules that you will keep in mind as you are going to be, as you're going to resolve a conflict or as you're going to talk about the conflict. Then comes the stage of actually discussing or brainstorming, whatever each of those, probably 10 areas they spoke about, how do you break it down, what kind of alternatives that you can bring in. Then as they're doing that, you're looking at the method. How are they doing it? What is their communication like within that step of dealing with the conflict and how they can change that. And then, so you're using this entire process here and there. Like I said, it may not be just watertight compartments, but nevertheless, you're learning and picking up a lot more on how to resolve conflicts by the time you come to a place of an outcome or of a decision. So in broad, these are maybe certain steps that we'd look at. I hope that was helpful, Pastor Jake. Pastor Jake, do you have any follow-up questions? Okay, yeah. You have posted here that this is good. Yes. Thank you. Any other questions that anyone would like to raise regarding this particular topic or if you have any other questions? I mean, if no one has any questions on this particular topic, maybe we could take up other questions as well. Just one more question. Please go ahead, Pastor. Yeah. Yeah. So this question is again on the issue of resolving conflicts. So my question is like, if one person is unwilling, totally unwilling to even come to the negotiating stage or to even come to the result, totally for whatever reason. So how do we go about it? Is there a method to it? Yes, of course, we need to pray and then God will work on their hearts. But the reasoning, let's say the reasoning is not happening. It's not bearing fruit. Like how long do we let it go? Is there anything, any strategy, any method if one party is unwilling to even sit down, talk for whatever reason? Yeah. Hmm. Yeah. So in conflicts, that becomes an issue conflict resolution that becomes an issue when the other person in the conflict is not willing to reconcile. So some of the things that again, I'm just telling you probably as part of the experience that we've had is let's say in a marriage, there's one person who's coming in the other person, other spouse is not willing. So one thing that we do work with this, the particular person who's entered into our session, we ask them to come to a place of, I mean, they need to temper down themselves before they make approaches to the spouse. So you make different approaches, one is directly, then you use other resources, other people resources, it could be family, it could be friends, it could be if they're believers, it's the church. And then, you know, even if none of that works, the next thing we suggest is time, give them time. And all of this is very individual based, right? There isn't, you should give five months or six months, it's not that you're actually working alongside with the willing partner to figure out how this is. But then these are some of the things that we would do. So we give them time because sometimes after a certain point of time, the other person may come and be willing to come in for help. The last thing that I personally do is as a counselor, I reach out and, you know, say that your spouse has approached me for this, would you be willing to talk about? Sometimes they do come in, they do talk, and individually with me where I'm able to just listen to them, help them through. And there are times we coax, I coax them into having a joint session, not for an outcome, but just being able to talk for a couple of sessions. So if I would definitely look at it with this kind of a progression. Now if that also doesn't work, it comes back to the pastor. We say the pastor takes on and, you know, helps because the word of the pastors, I've seen personally in my experience, the word of the pastor is always seen much, much more honorable. Thank you. Thank you so much, Jean. Yeah, Pastor Jake's has said, thank you. He's happy with the answer. We have one question posted here, so we will address that. And then Sam, you know, we can come to you. So the question here is from Kennedy. And he is asking, at what point in an interpersonal conflict would we bring in the element of punishment? So I'm assuming this question has more to do with conflict between superior and an employee, maybe in an office setup. So, Jean, if you could address this question of conflict between someone in a superior position and an employee who's working below them and a conflict that has occurred between these two parties. So punishment in general, I don't think has a place in interpersonal conflicts, but then if it is with the same example that Deepika has bought about, I'd call them consequences because let's say there are, there are certain guidelines that maybe in an office setup, you are to maintain which is not maintained. And as a result, there are consequences to it. Maybe the word punishment is probably, which we could probably replace it by maybe something like consequence. And yes, it does definitely have an element where even after a resolution, you probably do find that there is, there is an offense that keeps happening over and over again. Then yes, there is a consequence that may result. For example, maybe I look at it in a personal setting, let's say between two people, there is violence that's happening. There is physical abuse. Although physical abuse cannot be condoned, let's say the person apologizes, comes back, but it happens repeatedly. And then there needs to come a point where there is a consequence. Maybe there needs to be a partial separation so that this doesn't repeat itself. So I would replace the word consequences for that. Yeah, thank you. So Kennedy, is that helpful or would you like to ask anything further regarding this particular question? Otherwise, we can move to the next question. So Kennedy wants specifically to know at what point would we consider this further step of bringing in the consequences? Okay, so always at the first hand, you definitely attempt to reconcile. Again, it depends on the gravity of the situation. Like I said, if it's something like violence, and if it is you're putting someone in danger, then it should almost be immediate. Let's suppose it's something like, I mean, I can't say they're different gravity, but let's look at emotional abuse. Let's say there is a lot of insulting, a lot of words that keep coming in. There needs to be maybe a correction once probably knowing that the person is doing something about the evidence that the other person is working towards minimizing these abusive reactions. If you're seeing that, yes, you may give maybe probably, let's say another chance. Kennedy, I may not be able to say at what point and say, you know, at this second point, you should do a third point. It's difficult. It depends on the individual, every individual, every situation is different. But you would need to call out something if it isn't being changed rather than allowing it to keep brewing over and over. But yeah, I think I've given you some examples of certain guidelines. Thank you, Jean. So yeah, Kennedy is happy with that. So we can move into Sam's question. Sam, please unmute and go ahead. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Prasad. So, Pasad, in the graph that you shared on assertiveness versus cooperativeness, I love that. It brings in so much of structure and clarity. And, you know, as I see progression, like, so maybe at the bottom, we start with unassertive and uncooperative where, you know, I think that the whole thing is just avoiding the whole thing to moving towards compromise. And then finally, I think moving to a collaboration. So from a place of avoiding completely to compromising to collaborating, I think that's the progression. I love that. And I'm just thinking in terms of, but eventually it's like, you know, one goal of getting two people to resolve conflict is, you know, getting them from not talking to each other to kind of collaborating. But oftentimes, you know, is just we're happy to settle in the middle ground, which is compromising, you know, like, okay, stay sorry, shake hands, find what happened happened. And people tend to like, okay, you know, we were avoiding, but now at least we're talking, we're smiling at each other. And people are just happy to stay there. And that itself is not a full resolution, but anything around moving from a place of just compromising, which I told, and I see that's progressive progress, but not, you know, like, not the complete thing. So to move from a mediocre compromise to actually a genuine collaboration, anything on those lines. So I think maybe something that I missed saying is that, yes, like you said, Sam, a collaborative negotiation style is usually the most effective style for managing conflict and having those long-term relationships. However, these different conflict management styles can be effectively applied to different phases and types of conflict. So though we may have a predisposition towards a particular conflict style, we sometimes adopt different styles depending on the situation. Like for example, competing is useful when you need to assert your rights or protect your boundaries, especially in situations where others might try to take advantage of you. Sometimes accommodating may be the best immediate choice when your, let's suppose your boss is unhappy about a task that went all difficult. Avoiding can be wise when someone seems volatile or when we don't expect to deal with them again. Compromising may be a fine way to resolving a minor issue fast. So when you look at it, we may use a lot of these styles, but it's not that every point of time we may need to be collaborating. Nevertheless, when to move from compromising to collaborating, remember collaboration requires two people. If you want to be a collaborator, you need someone who is going to be just as much as a collaborator with you. And that definitely requires patience. It definitely requires openness. It requires humility. It requires you to be persuasive with them because the person you may be dealing with may be a compromiser. And so they may quickly compromise, but then you're the one who may need to bring them up to that speed of collaborating, of showing that openness and showing that willingness, being really patient and enduring to go through that. So it's a two-way process and it's for you to be able to train the other person as well into becoming a collaborator with some of these things that I had mentioned. I hope that was helpful, San. Yes, yes, Vasya. Thank you so much. Thank you for adding that extra layer of clarity. Thank you. Thank you so much, Jean. We have one more question here. This is from Deeksha who says that sometimes in a conflict situation, even though it's not really that person's nature generally, but due to news things which have come along, which have hurt a lot, this person would be probably reacting. And so she says over here, sometimes new things hurt us a lot and we try a lot to come out of them because we know it's not good for us. But the person is unable to come out of the hurt which has been inflicted. So in a conflict situation like that, what can that person do to come out of that? If you could help us with this question, please. Yeah, thanks Deeksha for the question. So I think what you mean to say is when there are, when already things have happened to us, when we've gone through some trauma, some difficulty, there are new things that add and pile on to us. We understand that it's not good, but we are not able to get out of it. Okay, so this probably, it may be a sub point of interpersonal conflicts, but this is something that we may need to individually heal and deal with. So there can be a trauma can definitely cause deep seated pain, deep seated heat, hurt, sorry, deep seated hurt and a lot of core beliefs about us, others and the future, right? The trauma does that. It affects us, it affects the way we see ourselves, the way we see others and the way we see our future. Now, and so anyone who comes in and maybe talks to us or says something to trigger us, it brings about the same situations of hurt. The important thing over here is to find healing for ourselves, to come to that place of inner holders, to come to that place of really spelling out what are some of those wrong thoughts and beliefs that we have kept with us that continues to stick in our lives and that becomes like a pattern for our behavior. So we may need to go back and really declutter that. And I would suggest, do it with the help of someone who can help you explore your innermost thoughts, your traumatic innermost thoughts that really cause you this sense of hurt and heal from that. Because until we are healed from within, we may not be able to deal with people. People will not change. Those who say things to you or may not even have even a smallest idea that they're hurting you. So you may not be able to change others, but you can work and, with the power of the Holy Spirit, really renew your own mind, come to a place of healing your mind with the word, coming back to, taking back the promises of God so that you are healed. And so when you deal with others, you're able to see the situation of people more objectively. Thank you. So, Diksha, is that helpful? Is there anything else? Okay, all right, yeah. So anyone else has any questions on this particular topic or anything else? We can take one more question before we conclude. So if anyone has any questions, you can raise a hand or you can post your question in the chat. All right, if there are no questions, we could maybe close with the word of prayer. Yeah, I think there are no other questions. If any one of the students could please pray even as we conclude this session, and after that we can all disperse. Could we have any one student pray and then we can conclude. All right, yeah, let's pray. We thank you, Lord, for today's session. Thank you, Lord, for Gene, for the information that she gave and all the advice that she was able to provide. Lord, we pray that you would help us in all our interpersonal relations so that we deal with them wisely. We deal with them with your help. And we pray, Lord, that today, even as we go through our classes, you would be with us and bless us in all that we do. Thank you, Lord. In Jesus' name, amen. Thank you so much, everyone, for joining in today. And yeah, we'll again meet next Thursday for our next mentoring session. Gene, thank you so much for this session. It's been most helpful. And yeah, so thank you. So yeah, we can now disperse for our classes. Thank you.