As you may know, I have have had a book project for a while. My auto-biography is on it’s final leg, and I am currently writing a chapter on the inner secrets of Scientology. The book covers my whole life, but with emphasis on my journey into and out of Scientology.
I have covered a lot in the book, but I may still have missed an angle. To complete the work, I would like to harvest ideas from you guys.
What would you like to read about in the book when it enter the stands later this year? Pitch in by adding you comments.
93 thoughts on “Inspiration for my book”
YAAAAAY! Geir’s gonna write a BOOK!!!!
And it’s gonna have “I am currently writing a chapter on the inner secrets of Scientology” in it!
This will be very good for people.
For me, I would like to see ALL THE INFORMATION A PERSON NEEDS IN ORDER TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS ABOUT THEIR OWN INVOLVEMENT IN SCIENTOLOGY.
That is, of course, extremely suppressive.
But that’s just me.
Way to go, Geir.
It’s not only being written – it is slated for publishing later this year. Is it the first book written by someone that did all the OT levels to 8?
Could you be more specific on what information you’d like to see in the book?
It’s from a consumer perspective.
If you were going to buy a car or a house, you would need to know certain things before you paid your money for it. Having this information would allow you to determine if the money you were going to pay, or the billion years you were going to spend, would be a good decision from the point of view of your own self-interests.
What do people need to know about Scientology in order for them to participate in it knowingly and without any fraud, lies or misrepresentations?
It can be like a Buyer’s Guide to Scientology.
This whole thing might be a little too much for one chapter in a book, but I am sure that you can give people the information they need – the good and the bad and the totally factual – to know what they are getting themselves into for their OT Levels.
And by the way, I think it would be the first book by a person who did all the way to OT 8 in the Church of Scientology.
Highly marketable, G!!!
G-man, OT 8 in detail. There are different versions out there as you know, but the version you did, in detail would be interesting. Also, the whole ship experience. And then, of course, all the BS you went through when you found yourself in Doubt.
One editing point I will make, however, if this will be in English, it would do to have someone copy edit it. I often see subjects and verbs that do not “agree” per English grammar. One specific example from above:
What would you like to read about in the book when it enter the stands later this year?
“Enter” needs to be “enters” to agree with “it”. I am amazed you write as well as you do in English. In fact, I am amazed that any non-native English speaker can write in English at all. Having had Swedish wrapped around me like a hungry boa constrictor for more than a year now, I have unlimited empathy for anyone trying to master English.
Still, I can’t wait to read your book!
I take it you would not object to blowing the lid off the confidentiality of the OT levels, then?
That ship sailed a long time ago.
What’s DM gonna do? Sue you? Yeah, right
What was the very first version of OT 8, Dan?
Did it include the references to Jesus, and to Lucifer as a “Bringer of Light”?
I would like to see info on what worked and what did not in scientology. And what kept you going all the way to the top. I woukd like to read the internal mental self talk a person had going up the bridge. How you convinced yourself not to stop even though the thing you wanted handled in the beginning never was handled. To help others ti open there eyes to the process of being trapped.
Also your thinking process when you started to think about getting out. The internal thoughts you had would be fascinating reading. Most of what is out there us about what “they” did or how “they” did it. But very little on how the self also participated in being trapped to continue…..
Me too would be interested in these.
Throughout the time you were in the Church – did you close your eyes and ears in terms of criticism on the Church in order not to have extra sec-checks etc.?
How did you deal with imperfections of how the Church functions which you witnessed yourself (e.g. the practice of disconnection)?
How did you deal with what you were expected to accept in terms of Ethics? I assume that also you found one or the other paragraph in the Ethics book which did not make sense to you.
Daniel: “did you close your eyes and ears in terms of criticism on the Church”
One of the very first things I learned, which may be called a stable datum somehow, was not to read, listen or pay attention to any critical remarks, etc, that they were all just trying to destroy us and were lies. Since I was public I did hear such things, but somehow I disregarded them completely and only learned how to handle responses to it. From then on I was blinded.
Yes – blow the lid of confidentiality.
“Blow the lid of confidentiality”. Why?
Marianne: ““Blow the lid of confidentiality”. Why?”
Me: Why not?
No, seriously, I really mean it. Why not?
There is not a single documented case anywhere of someone dying or coming to harm as a result of reading the OT levels. Let people make up their own mind, and lets rather not hide behind blanket statements (from Hubbard) that the OT levels are dynamite (per Hubbard) and they must be protected (per Hubbard) to avoid undue harm being brought to pre-OTs (per Hubbard) and likely harm to Hubbard’s perosnal reputation (per Alan McKinnon). Do you see the circular logic here? We must do all we can to protect Hubbard’s work because Hubbard said so. Nowhere is there a way to verify if Hubbard even spoke truth or not about these materials
If you want to look at it from the viewpoint of an auditor and that the sanctity of the materials must be preserved, we can look at that. At some point someoen is going to have to get the materials into the hands of good auditors who will make them available to pre-OTs. Davey’s church is certainly not about to do that, and I can well see him ordering all copies of OT materials destroyed “to protect the legacy from the “, and do it shortly before his own demise.
Now what do the auditors do? OT 8 will be GONE. The best chance OT 8 has is to get it out there where persons so inclined can turn it into something useful if that is possible. To do that, the secrecy must be gone. There is precedent for this – Hubbard himself said in the early 60s he workled very hard to get copies of his work all over the world so no single agent could destroy it. OK, that makes sense. Let’s do it again. All you have to do is give up the unverified blanket statement that the materials are “dangerous” and deserve to be kept hidden. The most dangerous place for them right now is in the clutches of the church, for that organizationw ill never let them go.
Aside any thoughts e.g. it can do harm, dynamite, protect…if anyone, who is reading a confidential material but has not gone through the process of auditing, auditors included – will that person really KNOW, not understand by the mind but KNOW how and why e.g. the “secret” OT8 material works? Blowing the lid off the confidentiality of the OT levels by breaking one’s word (given basically to oneself) as to keep something confidential, who will it really benefit if it is published in a BOOK?
The cat is already well out of the bag, the toothpaste is out of the tube.
I abhor the practice of keeping information secret from those it is meant to serve.
Agreed. If they can understand it and are willing to and in practice use it for their or others’ benefit.
Marianne: “Blowing the lid off the confidentiality of the OT levels by breaking one’s word (given basically to oneself) as to keep something confidential, who will it really benefit if it is published in a BOOK?”
I can only answer for myself, and I have not done any OT levels. Quite obviously I am in no position to judge their worth or validity *as an auditing level*.
That’s why I made reference to auditors who might want to have it.
As to the question about breaking one’s word to oneself, that’s much more fluid. The circumstances under which Geir received the materials no longer exist – CoS has definitely not kept up their end of the exchange bargain. Perhaps neither did Hubbard (see Geir’s take on what he thinks the OT levels actually address). This is a game changer, in the presence of a game changer one should re-evaluate one’s position in the game. There’s no hard and fast rules about this, it’s a point of personal integrity. Promises are not absolute.
It does not matter what Alan thinks in this though. I do not have the materials, I have not done the level, I have insufficient information and it’s highly unlikely little old me is going to persuade Geir to do something. But I do have an opinion and for what it’s worth I think someone is going to have to get OT8 out of DM’s clutches, for the reasons I mentioned earlier. And yes, perhaps a book is not the best vehicle.
Does that answer your question?
Yes, you answered it! Thanks!! One point, though, I would like to know what you think about it.
“….it’s a point of personal integrity.” Is there a thing like pan-determined integrity? My instant thought for it as an illustration was Aikido. Its spirit. Do you think it’s possible?
Geir also answered it above. “The cat is already well out of the bag.”
Marianne: “Is there a thing like pan-determined integrity? My instant thought for it as an illustration was Aikido. Its spirit. Do you think it’s possible?”
I’m not sure about pan-determined integrity, I think that is more an abstract concept that our minds can easily grasp and conceive of, but does not actually exist in reality, much like infinity. The closest thing I can think of in my experience is dealing with my kids. Any parent knows this one – siblings have a huge fight over something trivial – it’s easy for me to stay out of it and retain my integrity as a parent simply because the outcome does not matter; the kids will resolve it by themselves anyway.
I’ve had my integrity tested in broader ways, but in every case the game hadn’t changed so it was easy to stick to the original agreement. There was no need to re-examine the integrity, I could just say outright I felt the original agreement held and carry on.
As for Aikido, I’m not familiar with it, by I thought thhese two snippets from wikipedia were relevant:
“Aikido demonstrates this philosophy in its emphasis on mastering martial arts so that one may receive an attack and harmlessly redirect it. In an ideal resolution, not only is the receiver unharmed, but so is the attacker.”
I don’t think this is true. In this universe it does not appear to be possible to interact with a system without changing the system in some way – your mere presence in the system has already affected the outcome. So the attacker will never truly be unharmed. What is possible though is to minimize the harm done, usually by applying the minimum of effort.
So, we could approximate pan-determined integrity by making the outcome more certain and safer, or making it something that doesn’t actually matter either way. But you can always give bigger and better examples till you reach a point where the person IS now involved, and then it is no longer pan-determined.
“Ukemi (受身?) refers to the act of receiving a technique. Good ukemi involves attention to the technique, the partner and the immediate environment—it is an active rather than a passive receiving of aikido. The fall itself is part of aikido, and is a way for the practitioner to receive, safely, what would otherwise be a devastating strike or throw.”
This quote illustrates the difference between simulations or training and real life. using martial arts as a metaphor for life, in training we simulate a situation that requires a response, but in large part you have a good idea what the other guy is going to do (i.e. follow the training regimen). He will not switch action half-way, pull out a gun and shoot you in the head. The training is also not no-holds barred, full contact. The training partner is being somewhat co-operative. In real life, those contraints can be considerably less, and the pan-determined aspect falls away.
But there is value in all of this. By practising it (even just as a mock-up) one can learn to exercise appropriate judgement.
“your mere presence in the system has already affected the outcome” – that’s it! PRESENCE can generate PRESENCE. System gone!
What I first thought was when one redirected the force-energy of the opponent, or much better, didn’t generate any force-energy by just being present.
Marianne: “PRESENCE can generate PRESENCE. System gone!”
That went a little over my head (different realities). Could you elaborate a little more please?
Marianne: “PRESENCE can generate PRESENCE. System gone!”
Splog: That went a little over my head (different realities). Could you elaborate a little more please?
Dee: You’re not alone. I find a lot goes over my head into the blue.
Alan…Sorry, I didn’t mean to cause an ARCx. Thank you for pointing out to me that I didn’t get my message through. It happens to me that I don’t use enough words in a com. I am going to improve it.
By Presence I simply mean being there and perceiving without making a label about the perception in the mind. Kind of continuous perceiving. It is a clear-mind-clear-space being. This Presence can have an effect that the other person also gets into the present time. So actions arise from the now.
Presence can generate Presence means the absence of thought (mind, which may be called a system referring to our previous com.) which is basically relying on past experience and perception. Did I succeed in getting it through now?
Yes, I see where you are going with this.
“This Presence can have an effect that the other person also gets into the present time.”
I’ve seen this happen, I’ve done it myself where the other person is a little griefy or distracted or somehow not quite in present time. Just being there and observing produces a change. With another live being it is much easier to see as a being can react and MEST can’t). The other person experiences a change which in turn changes me. And so on and so on.
We call this communication.
[I just thought of something. I had not before examined if each step of the Comm Formula changes both ends. I just kind of assumed that Cause would stay static and Effect would experience a change. I don’t think that is true. I’m going to have to think about this some more.]
Please see my message to Alan. Thank you for telling me that you haven’t understood some/many of my previous coms. Probably not only you but some other commenters as well. I have been sensing that for some time. The responsibility is mine. I am going to improve the quality of my coms. Thanks for understanding it!
MT: Please see my message to Alan. Thank you for telling me that you haven’t understood some/many of my previous coms.
Not a problem and glad that Alan mentioned it. I certainly was not ARCx, just passed them over. One thing I don’t understand is excessive quote marks around individual words. It’s confusing to me, or my old eyeballs as to meaning, tho probably more the eyes, akin to artwork. You have an unique style! 🙂
“The other being experiences a change which in turn changes me”
Did you observe the following: your child is angry, is shouting a little, his eyes are throwing lightening. You are there, just observing the scene (not getting reactive). Interestingly, by this presence-observation there is no more shouting (sounds), no more lightening (kind of little electricity). The child gets calm and gets into present time. Both of you are in the now. Who/what are you in communication in this example?
Is it a form of having an effect on your child or on Mest? Or both?
“Is it a form of having an effect on y.our child or on Mest? Or both?”
Me? I honestly don’t know. But it doesn’t matter – I see the result and I communicate more. I don’t need to know why it works, or to speculate about it.
It reads : in communication WITH (sorry)
Yes, there is no need to speculate about it. It was nice talking to you about it, thanks!
I would appreciate if you could consider to convey:
– The scene how the OT’S are hold on a tied leash to be obedient
to the Church’s leadership and their whims (vs “total freedom”),
– and the interference in their decisions and lives,
– and how they are used to manipulate others.
– The politically motivated “SP” declares (and threats of declares),
– and the pressure of disconnection when not toeing the line,
– and the resulting behavior of your fellow Scientologists.
– The acting of “all is groovy” all times (for PR reasons).
– The good you got out of the levels, how you were benefiting from it.
– Your view on OT3.
– The EP of OT8 and its relation to what is expected, promoted (cause over M,E,S,T…)
– Your experiences on the Freewinds
I agree with all the above particularly on the OT 8 since that would make it most interesting. The top secret now in the organization. Also the dangerous things to be aware of when looking at it as a religion. I’m sure you will do well, whatever you write. Good to hear of your book.
I would like it if you addressed the membership issue. As it is, the individual who takes any course, even the little public division courses, has to have an IAS membership in force. The Church gives the new person a free six months membership. This is not a choice and the new member is never given a choice, nor enough information to even make a reasonable choice. Now they are a “member.” By “accepting” that freebie, they are now classed as being subject to the rules of being a Scientologist, even though they have no idea what that means or what those rules are.
When their six months is up, they are required to pay for renewing their membership, either buying an annual or a lifetime. Lifetime memberships are cheaper over a lifetime, so many of these people buy lifetimes. They probably still have insufficient information to make that decision, but they like their auditing or courses, so they go for the lifetime membership.
What they realize, and could not possibly realize, is that the only way to get off that membership roster is to resign, and resigning is a suppressive act. The lucky ones have no family or friends involved in the Church and so resigning is no big deal to them. The unlucky ones do, and resigning means having their relationships severed by the disconnection practices of the Church.
This is probably the most critical thing a new person needs to know.
Maria: a free six months membership
Excellent point! Free, no way, just as you say and one of the first hooks which they don’t realize it will cost them, in more than money even. Something they should be told up front to be fair. Not different than con business that work that way. Buyer beware even in religion.
I expect that a least a number of people who will buy your book will be people who are worried or concerned about a friend or relative’s association with Scientology, as a cult. I think it would be beneficial to tell people what you think will and will not be a beneficial means of addressing their concerns with the person they are worried about.
I’m on a roll.
Perhaps you could touch on the importance of differentiating between a person’s religious beliefs and their rights to them and their rights to be protected from out and out abuse in the name of a religion.
For example, new people do not understand that by accepting membership, they are forswearing their rights to use the judicial system, to apply for redress to the labor board, etc. i.e. Scientologists do not have the normal rights afforded to regular citizens, they must use the Scientology “justice” system. Failure to use that system will find them forcibly ejected from the group.
I think an important topic could also be the impact of the internet and social applications like facebook, blogging, forums, etc. being classed as public venues, and that posting on those public venues is NOT ALLOWED and very much considered to be crimes and high crimes.
How about the contradictory nature of the creed versus the justice codes and the material on critical attitudes?
Maria: I’m on a roll.
Good roll and excellent points. 🙂
Another thing that is possibly important for new people to understand is that if they complete a course or service in the Church of Scientology, the completion will be published in one of the Church magazines. They will then be listed on the truth about scientology website as having done Scientology courses/services. This is NOT an option. the same is true if they buy a lifetime membership — their name will be listed in the IAS magazine. Even if they stop attending services with or without formal resignation, they will continue to be counted as a member.
Also, it is not true that Scientology is non-denominational. They will be required to stop other practices, and they will be required to stop studying other practices, even the movie “The Secret” can be seen to be another practice that is forbidden.
Sea Org recruiters routinely misrepresent what conditions may be expected by signing up as a Sea Org member.
I’d like to see factual and accurate *current* information about the lying that goes on. Lying from reges, recruiters, promises made and broken, even from Hubbard himself.
I leave it to you to figure out the format, but lying is a big button with people.
Al: I leave it to you to figure out the format, but lying is a big button with people.
Chris: Huge button… My ex in laws were so exasperated with the lies that they hired deprogrammers to kidnap my ex and daughter. True story.
Chris: Huge button… My ex in laws were so exasperated with the lies that they hired deprogrammers to kidnap my ex and daughter. True story.
Me: I didn’t know that. Did it work out in the end?
Alan: I didn’t know that. Did it work out in the end?
Chris: Cult Awareness Network had already been infiltrated and warned OSA of the planned deprogramming and a planned family get together was cancelled by my ex without preamble. Then she blasted her family in an explosive “how dare you” letter of disconnection and ultimately they disinherited her as a protection toward their estate planning. My ex and I were divorced and not in communication at that point and neither was I in communication with my in laws. I learned this story much later from my daughter and then confirmed by my in laws who I had reconnected with a few years after leaving the SO for my daughter’s sake.
So the Type A PTS situation which I had warned my ex- and HCO about for years, and for which trouble I had been told to bugger-off and stop making up and causing trouble as “the situation was well in hand” finally came to this head 20 years ago. Shortly after, I was declared an SP and neither my oldest daughter nor I have had any word from my ex- since that time. The “suppressive” situation of my ex- with her parents could always have been handled simply and effectively if my ex- would simply have stayed in touch with her folks — a perfectly decent, honest, kind and caring middle class Americana couple.
So did it work out in the end? Not yet.
Chris T: “So did it work out in the end? Not yet.”
Me: I see. I tend to get worked up quite a lot when I hear stories like that. All I can say is “Hang in there, buddy.”
It also sounds like a classic case of the PTS person is the one causing the antagonism, and to be honest I’ve done more than my fair share of that myself.
Alan: All I can say is “Hang in there, buddy.” . . . It also sounds like a classic case of the PTS person is the one causing the antagonism, . . .
Chris: Thank you; however, its been two decades and life moves on. My oldest daughter’s life and mine are full and rich. I do have long term goals in this direction; however, I feel that certain twist in my gut when I get on this subject for my ex- was not interested in Scientology for the first couple years I was involved. So I always remember it was my idea to get involved. Funny because in the beginning the ethics officer tried to tell me that my ex- was being a problem by not being a Scientologist and I told that EO to relax that my ex- was fine and not to worry about it. Oh the irony! haha. I try to maintain old telephone numbers and a high visibility for that day when the ex- decides to give a call. When I help her leave COS I will feel that debt is paid; however, if that doesn’t happen, I do understand that the choices have always been hers to make as well as mine.
In the final chapter, I would like to read about the YOU in the NOW. That is your innermost views, feelings, experiences of YOUR everyday life, the world….
I have observed that Scientologists quickly become jaded on the significance of subjects like love, family, and death. The materials and the culture bring about an indifference that often makes disconnection from them very easy. Perhaps if you were to tell how these subjects changed in viewpoint, how you and your loved ones saw things and responded to things, before Scientology and through your path into and out of Scientology.
Just a suggestion 🙂
I would like to read about the inspiration your family gave you in your childhood. I would like also to read about your perception about Norway in your childhood…Remember please many of us are foreigners, Norway is respected country, I’m curious to read 2 or 3 pages about Norway in the 70’s, seen through the eyes of a child, as you were that time.
Norway is a respected country?
I couldn’t help it.
It was just too good to pass up. :>
Damn, you missed the double-meaning of “Troll” here.
Norway is a highly respected country. Slartibartfast won a design award for all those amazing fjords and wrinkly bits down the coast.
And the trolls! Don’t forget the big hairy guys.
Oh wait, I get it now! With all those fjords and wrinkly bits and rivers and stuff, you must have lots and lots of bridges for trolls to lurk under.
You got it! And Alanzo is invited to replace one of the retired ones.
Isene: And the trolls! Don’t forget the big hairy guys.
OH, The Trolls! Now I get it. Saw them at Epcot, fantastic looking creatures.
Geir: Stop trolling!
Chris: LOL – I get it.
Yes, it is!
I would like you to write everything you know about love. 🙂
Me too. It could however be a blog post too, I would be interested in how each of us sees it.
Also, a little more about “the bunch of rules of happy living”.
I may be late on this Geir, but I would like to know the FIRST time in Scn when you thought to yourself “WTF is going on here?” In other words, how long were you in Scn before that occurred.
I remember mine well. IAS if you can imagine
Do you want to include a story on how they use their members to be spies for years? I’ve got one.
deE: Do you want to include a story on how they use their members to be spies for years?
Chris: You’ve got my attention.
Chris: You’ve got my attention.
Neat! Have you read Nancy Many’s Book? After being in touch with her, we both found that we in the field for about the same 4 years. In the middle of that time period the GO changed to OSA but we were never told and it was business as usual. We can back each other up on more of their PR lies. My story is nothing compared to Nancy’s.
I think it would be sad if your book was all about Scientology. I would love to read about your life before Scientology. When you were a little boy, the things you thought about and your curiosity. And what lead you into the path of Scientology. Naturally Scientology will be a big part of your book. I would love to read about all the interesting people you have met in your life, this one anyway. I would like to know more about my friend. xxxx
How about your past lives too?!
I don’t have thousands of pages to fill 😉
Okay, just some of the more interesting ones. Or like a sort of cross section of them all. You can’t leave out this very important part of both Scientology and YOU.
Next book and a movie based on it!
Movie first? 🙂
Geir, will you include your speculation about what the OT levels actually address? The usual options are that it’s secret and sacred lore that explains the condition of this sector of the universe, or it’s the fevered imaginings of a hack science fiction writer. I think it would be helpful for people to know there are other possible explanations, including at least one that could fit rationally into their paradigm. And coming from an OT8 it wold carry some credibility.
Lots of this 🙂
Great! I look forward to reading your book. Personally I have no doubt about the gains I’ve had from doing the OT levels (through OT IV) even if some of them are hard to put into words, and I can see similar gains in others at that same level. That said though, I still have some trouble swallowing Hubbard’s back story about it. I’m sure there are others in a similar frame of mind.
When the last question is answered by one’s mind, what does remain? What mind is that? What is left?
Is it included in your book?
Looks like you have enough requests to write several books! Maybe you should write a series!
Glad to hear you’re writing a book. At times, I’ve wondered how many potential philosophical writers blunted their ambitions because they were initially misled to believe L Ron had already done it all. What a huge loss of creativity and insight to mankind.
Every time I see someone come out and re-realise they have something unique and worthy to contribute, I applaud for the person, for me, for the added wealth of inspiration to the world.
What I’d personally like to see is your moment-to-moment thought processes during the mind control, your emotions, descriptions of your moment to moment actions and afterward. My favourite writers do this. What I find particularly unique about you is your innate mental skills to turn completely to rationality and reason and turn off all that has not been proven fact. You have a beautiful mind, Geir. Something like the movie.
Cogito ergo sum. You may just resonate with Rene Descartes and Plato; you seem to have that sort of mind. If you haven’t already familiarised yourself with these philosophers, I believe you’d be doing yourself a disservice not to study up on them soon.
I have only the loftiest expectations of you. By the end of your biography, I’d like to see you set aside the scn stuff, start with a basic like Descrates and take it further. And then write a second book. Whatever you’ve found useful in scn may just come to mind to you then, but with an entirely different perspective.
When you find that new perspective (not a rehash of others), we all regain what Hubbard thwarted in us and stole from us. I’d like to see a renaissance of restored ambitions in others to take the whole field of philosophy further, for these are the people who were attracted to scn. Like you.
I’d like you to lead that renaissance in Europe.
And if that’s too much, don’t worry – you’re still a beautiful person to your friends, your family and loved ones and those are the ones that really matter.
Thank you. That made my day 🙂
Not sure of your interest, but in your writing career, children’s books are very important.
😀 I’m so glad, Geir.
On your “Fuck It” discussion, you made a comment:
2013-03-27 at 15:42
You point to something interesting here. Cause and effect are two sides of the same coin, I believe.”
I love this. It makes scales nothing more than constructs of the mind. What a basic truth, what a springboard statement for health, growth, love and success.This view is completely missing from modern isms, ologies and alternatives, which are so “me me me” oriented.
Yet – where in life, in any physical or other true study, is this untrue? You have the hard science & engineering background (I do not) – I’m just curious, is that universally true in the hard sciences?
If so, that’s a breathtakingly new, unexplored philosophical place to go. I want it. Badly.
Alanzo got me thinking on this one. I’ll ponder it further. Have book to wrap up first that I think it will rip OSA a new one.
Good on ya! I look forward to reading your views on the cause/effect thing when you can get to it. To me, it means those that are highly compassionate need not reign in their sensitivities for fear of being the effect of them, if an understanding of the strength of compassion and it’s flipside – more inner and outer strength (cause) – can be achieved.
This is quite different than views of karma. I’m probably not communicating this well, but then, nobody has explored this yet to offer new concepts in this direction, though it’s been touched on with concepts like embracing pain.
Alanzo writes some awesome things. Great creative thinker.
Yes. It is a very interesting angle.
Isene: I think it will rip OSA a new one.
Good on ya!
Thank you Marianne. You’re sweet.
Just a tip (you may have already thought about it) : you could make a collection of the most insightful and funniest comments of the bloggers and publish them in another book! Also, they could be arranged around either topics, or characters.
Dee is right. A children’s book based on your earlier fantasy stories in your mind. Looks to be a pretty nice writing career ahead of you!
MT: “based on your earlier fantasy stories in your mind”
I believe Isene could in present time create some children’s stories that would be most beneficial to our youth, be they fantasy or not. Don’t ya think?
Marianne, you made me think of the one children’s book author in a class of his own:
Hans Christian Andersen. like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMKxnYRhk6I for example.
When I was a child and finished Catholic confirmation, the usual gift in my family was a religious statue. No statue, I pleaded – just Hans Christian Andersen books. My mother gave in, beautiful woman. The books were gorgeous. They gave me such a sense of well-being and so much happiness and inspiration.
Imagine another children’s writer of this calibre inspiring children with the simple beauty of life and imagination and self-confidence, but also teaching children that imagination is a personal thing and not to mix it up with reality, or allow others to manipulate them with their imaginations. Kids need that. There hasn’t been a childrens’ writer of his calibre since.
I had a profound shift yesterday. When one gets true inspiration, one stops writing one’s book. End of story. End of creating past relationships and characters. End of the Matrix. Power. Here and now.
I would include in my book, Geir, that it is a story of the past. A story but not the truth itself. The truth is in the moment, there is no time in it. (much like as it is expressed in the definition of as-is-ness).