The end product of “trying” is “having tried“.
“Trying”
The end product of “trying” is “having tried“.
-
Follow
Following
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
The end product of “trying” is “having tried“.
Geir Isene - uncut 
Sometimes you stop trying because you succeed!
🙂
Quite so, then you will usually go ahead and try something else … 🙂
Yoda, “There is no try. You do or you do not.”
BINGO!
I’m not sure if I agree completely. I guess we all have at one time or another been at the stage of “I don’t know if I can do …” At that stage I guess you TRY.
You may come to the stages like “Wow I can maybe do …” or even to the point where stop thinking about or feeling whether you can do or not, then I guess you just DO … 🙂
At the precise moment you DO, then you stopped trying.
Try – merely a word to fill in the void. You can DO or you can NOT DO.
If you look for a real life example of try you won’t find it. If you try to open a door – you will either open the door or not open the door.
Try fills the void and makes some feel better because they at least thought of doing it.
To say “I tried ….” merely states you had some thought about the outcome. In the real world “try” does not exist.
A litlle execise for you all : Please do sit down in a Lotus-position, preferrably without trying … 😉
Then I do not.
I just finished the Comm. Course and I bought the HQS, Course this was Monday evening. She wanted to know when I will start my new course. I said I will try to be here on Friday.
She said without ceremony since I was sitting front or her desk.
“TRY TO stand up”…………….I stood up, she said thank you finished the comm. Cycle with a thank you. And said:
“Try to sit down”……………….I set, she said thank you her TR’s were in.
“Try to stand up”……………… I did but I froze in that moment as I have standing there and I look-at her and said I be here on Friday. She smiled.
I had a major cognition out of a small exercise. IT was: I could sit or stand up but not while trying. Trying could not make me stand or sit.
We do or we don’t do something. Sometimes WE NEED TO RE-DO over and over again till something is done but the action was done each time but not to satisfaction. It was just done in different ways.
We all know the end product of NOT trying, right? 🙂
Well, I do, at least … Been there etc. … 😦 but no more … 🙂
K. So a knight in shining armor with a +2 battle ax attacks a rat in D&D.
He rolls and fails.
He rolls again after the rat’s turn and cuts the vermin in twain and sees what it had for breakfast. And breakfast was nasty tasting troll carrion.
So it it …
“Do or do not?”
or ….
“Roll or roll not?”
I prefer ….
“ROLL OR ROLL NOT THERE IS NO TRY.”
EXAMPLE #2. Homer Simpson.
He reaches for a Donut and fails. (Doh!)
He reaches for a Donut and Succeeds (Donut!)
“Doh or Donut, there is no donut holes.”
There are rare occasions in which life goes on smoothly, events articulate and flow together, the efforts to push this or that are left behind, there is no need to resist any opposing forces…….
That seems to be a level above trying and even above doing.
Seems like it is a level of pure beingness.
What if each cycle of action has a beingness associated to it, maybe the one which originated it, and any other could introduce counter intentions, other intentions, randomity, etc.
In any case,I would dare saying the person who is trying has skipped a gradient at the level of beingness.
So the moment we are preparing ourselves “to try”, maybe we should step back and check the beingness under which we are approaching this cycle, until we are in a state of doing, or not needing to do anything about it
Just some thoughts on trying:
Try to open the door, versus opening the door. This assumes the door is not sealed shut, it assumes that you have the strength to open the door, the dexterity and skill to open the door. It assumes that you are confident that what is on the other side of the door will be something you are willing to experience. It assumes that you are certain that this is a beneficial direction and action. It assumes that you are sure that the door will not slam shut behind you closing off retreat. To my way of thinking, trying is listening at the door, sampling the level of skill and ability presently available, holding back in caution. And then too, there is the continual reminder in our lives that our bodies are very destructible and very limited.
Trying something out. Like a taste test to see if you like the experience before you commit to it and allow it to manifest. Checking out the idea of doing / experience in a kind of preview mode.
Sometimes you don’t seem to have this element of trying / previewing choices, where you can sort of survey your possibilities – they are upon you and all you can do is sink or swim. Often described as circumstance beyond your control, something you didn’t predict, something you never imagined would happen as a result of opening a door, entering a particular experience. Ripple result and you have no idea what started that ripple that expanded into a momentum that appears to have little or nothing to do with your own choices.
Trying may be a helpful / cautionary mechanism. What an odd world it would be if our every impulse and thought manifested – think elephants as instant elephants in the living room! What a mess!
For me, it seems that trying and doubting go hand in hand. The corollary would then be doing and knowing. In between is courage and faith on one hand, cowardice and fear on the other and in between would lie wisdom.
My teacher in this field is Yoda 🙂
Good post, Maria. Another way to express the different approaches you described might be: Tone 40 vs. KRC at various levels up and down the scale. Geir likes the straight shot – Tone 40. 🙂
Good comment, I agree heartily.
I recognize the attitude (idea) that any time one tries, then one should try with all his/her will and heart, yes, but there are complex things where the “phase of trying” will last a significant period of time …
Tor Ivar
There were times when I tried something and succeeded. Did I do something the wrong way? :O
No, but you did it.
“Try some of my dinner, honey.”
“Well okay, if you insist, dear.”
Did you end up eating it or not?
I did.
Another word for “do”.
🙂
Then you ended up doing. Not trying 🙂
Yep. And if the food had fallen off the fork before reaching my mouth, and I gave up at that point, I would’ve been merely trying.
And then I would’ve had to tell people that I tried to try her food rather than I tried her food.
Simply doing is easier, I say.
🙂
What about “trying” vs “doing” on OT effects like exteriorization? Or all the effects of clear described by Hubbard?
Nobody is even TRYING to get James Randi’s million dollars for his Million Dollar Challenge. And for a real OT, that would be a snap.
EXAMPLE OF TESTABLE CLAIM: “I can go exterior and read random cards facing away from me with 100% accuracy.”
Do it and – Cha-Ching! You win. The money is really there folks. Randi didn’t “try” to secure a million dollars he can bestow. It’s real. It’s in an account. He DID It.
Seems to me like there is a whole lot of TRYING going on.But Randi still has his cool million.
After all this time, I finally see that Scientology is just meat TRYING to be spirit. And according to Geir, that’s impossible because of system theory.
So, let’s sum it up with a little definition:
Scientology, (defn) “Human meat TRYING to be OT.”
“Nobody is even TRYING to get James Randi’s million dollars for his Million Dollar Challenge.”
Hi kg. There were a couple of long threads on Marty’s blog about OT abilities, where quite a few OT’s gave answers to that riddle. Also a couple threads on Jeff Hawkins’ blog on the same subject. Some pretty interesting and unexpected answers were given. Why not check it out?
Yup. I read them awhile ago and the point they make directly and/or indirectly is clear.
“Hubbard didn’t make real OTs.”
He didn’t DO it.
I sure wish somebody would. Or at least create a group of people that could exteriorize and read cards with 100% accuracy with the doer as the ultimate observer.
Just like the classic cartoon of Michigan J. Frog. He only dances when there is ONE UNIQUE observer. Sadly, no such consistent stories emerge of people reading random cards across a room.
But at least one would know that when he/she was a sole observer he/she COULD actually exteriorize and read cards across a room with 100% accuracy.
Of course, the co-creation universe proponents would say that the co-creation imposes multiple observers even when one person is alone in a room, so OT effects STILL can’t happen.
Which would leave only one’s mind or Second Life where OT effects can occur.
And if “imagine” is a version of “do” then GO YODA PUPPET!
You made a good comparison – Michigan J Frog. I got this same idea from the commenters and I understood from them WHY it doesn’t work to put their abilities on display. It takes two to tango with a Frog. And some people not only won’t do it but will put up blocks and barriers to others doing so – a la Entanglement. On this point, BTW, you did see “consistent stories emerge,” didn’t you? 😉
Nevertheless, I don’t have reason to disagree with you that FULL (“real”) OTs” haven’t yet been made and with those I suppose anything could be done – your word “imagine” is pretty much the same as “postulate.” Second Life may be a microcosm and the mind truly is where all “effects can occur,” including on quanta.
I remain hopefully and optimistically yours… 🙂
Marildi.
Get a deck of playing cards by yourself. Randomly choose cards and turn them away from you.
Exteriorize and read them.
Write down what you see.
Check your work.
Try? or Do?
Do or do not.
K. “Do or do not” Geir.
Sure.
Pick random cards or roll and cover dice or position the cards so the values are not visible from your current angle.
Exteriorize and read them. “DO.”
Go look at them and compare them to what you wrote down.
Write down your hits and misses.
Let us know how you “Do” or “Do not.”
WE will never know for sure, cuz you could lie or be delusional. BUT YOU WILL KNOW YOU CAN TRULY EXTERIORIZE.
Sheesh. Directions SUCK. Srry.
1. Generate random values with cards or dice where you cannot see them from one angle but could from another.
2. Exteriorize and read the values.
3. WRITE DOWN THE VALUES.
4. Go look at the real cards or dice and compare them to the values you wrote down.
5. Write down your hits and misses on paper as you discover them.
Let us know if you “Do” or “Do not.”
Actually, “trying” may be applicable here. The “old” OT levels reportedly were drills in OT abilities – based on the idea that at a certain point in spiritual advancement OT ability is actually there, latent, but needs developing with drill.
Anyway, surely you don’t think what you described above isn’t being done by some people, Scn processed OTs or not. Hey, even the military recognizes the paranormal (e.g. remote viewing) and many police departments hire psychics nowadays, etc. And amongst OTs and those close to them , OT stuff does happen. On those “OT Abilities” threads very “consistent stories emerged” along these lines.
Wouldn’t that be fun if in time I made a believer out of you? 🙂