Religion is hurting spirituality

If a basis for spirituality is free will, then any enforced will, any dogma is hurting spirituality.

Any set belief will hamper the fluid nature of the spirit.

Religion is the enemy of spirituality, not science. Science is fluid in its search for truth as opposed to religiously dogmatic.

human

202 thoughts on “Religion is hurting spirituality

  1. Religion seems to be able to introduce people to a limitless spiritual dimension and then proceed to place many “have-to’s” in the way of truly experiencing it.

    The Dalai Llama wrote snook called “the Universe on an Atom” that draws parallels between Buddhism, as a method and science.

  2. Depends, some scientists try to destroy religions and spirituality, or enforce their beliefs that free will doesn’t exist.

    Here’s one I recently watched and he’s not explicitly saying we have free will but is saying determinism is uncertain at least.

    1. What I often see is that religious people defend spirituality and worse, spiritual people defending religion(s). That is a foot bullet IMO.

      1. Exactly. Thinking about oneself and considering one’s place in the world is very different from forming up ideologies and pushing them at others for the purpose of selfishly gathering power and material support. Religion for me is an abomination of, and puts an utter stop to the decent curiosity that makes us consider ourselves and the stars.

          1. 3years back I was impressed by your knowledge but by now I know you as a robot have the ability to compile and represent that compiled material.. regurgitate it back but you don’t have the ability to perceive anything outside of that learned stuff. Your filters will not allow you to see outside of that learned stuff

        1. To be aware something has to be there first… So awareness is not the essence of spirituality.. awareness is already a doing-ness. You read that so place and that sounded good to you and went into agreement! There is something else before awareness.

          1. i see consciousness as Life’s ability and skill to create..(‘doingness’, ‘motion’)
            i see awareness as a quality of Life…( ‘stillness’, ‘no-motion)
            as i see it, they are inseparable and simultaneous

            1. No. I just like the company of those who can express better
              what i cannot yet. Most ‘gurus’ admit, that there is a learning
              process for them to find the words which are the closest in
              their meaning as pointers to the experience itself. At present
              i am looking at the meanings of awareness and consciousness.
              As they are used interchangibly and thus can cause a slight
              confusion.
              What i wrote above is coming out of experience. I am on being
              able to express that better. You may look at all the definitions
              of aware and conscious and see the differences…
              Which of the two has ‘doingness’ in it? Please also see the
              archaic of COnSCIOUS.

              http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/aware

              http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conscious

          2. Thanks Elizabeth. I really find this comment helpful. Not sure if I can put the reason that this resonated with me in to words, but I’d like to let you know that it did.

            1. Qoooooo we simply know… but that knowledge is doubted and it is the doubts which can be confronted and it will erase.
              That gut feeling is the real thing. when you listen to that you wont go wrong. 🙂

        2. and you are full of hot air… simply because you cant see further that promotion of your blog! you are like a old hungry spider weaving its trap to catch the next victim with smart sounding words.. I don’t like phonies… and you are one.. Am I evaluating and invalidating here! I sure do!..

        3. But I AM not wrong on that hehehe and I know It is you need to remove few million layers of occlusions to understand that awareness is a doing -ness and awareness is all ready into human considerations.

      2. I don’t see a big difference, someone gets spiritual and if people agree with how they got there it becomes religion with dogma, how fluid or enforced up to the group.

    2. first thing I did when I read this article is google spirituality because

      I was vague on it, wikipedia says:
      The term “spirituality” lacks a definitive definition…

      to me the difference being one is organized and explicit the other is implicit, they are both beliefs not scientific fact, actuality not reality but that’s just my current opinion

      1. Hi Alanzo, I had previously thought and predicted that Marty was simply an ex- who was splintering and gathering followers, money and disaffected Church power for himself to use in the reformation. After following his blog for years, he seems a lot more human, less robotic, and a lot like me just trying to comes to grips with his own existence. I love you and Geir, Vinaire, Marildi, Elizabeth, and the many more who routinely contribute their thoughts and opinions here to help me gain perspective on my roiling world. Thanks everyone. Good Luck this weekend Geir! ~Chris

  3. IMHO
    Religion is Faith based –
    Spirituality is experienced based –
    Science is measurable and repeatable based –
    So there is no comparison between them.
    Each has been wrong, hurtful and barbaric at times and yet each has been a saving grace and humanitarian. How we use it is the important part.

      1. That consideration would be part of energy phenomena too.

        What is this consideration of will? It is some kind of emotive force. Where does this force come from? I think that such force is intrinsic to the energy phenomenon. There are fantastic numbers of “gears” meshing together here.

        Sent from my iPhone

        >

          1. “so do you think our ability to observe is also just a result of energy?”

            What we don’t know fills a universe. We have to continue to learn. There are as many metaphors for this as there awarenesses.

          2. KHTK postulates that the theoretical ground state for this universe is an undisturbed primordial field that has no frequency, wavelength or period.

            For disturbance to occur in the primordial field, a primordial energy must also be postulated.

            In the ancient scriptures, these two fundamental postulates of primordial field and primordial energy are referred to as Shiva and Shakti respectively. A reference to them is made in the essay ZERO, ONE, INFINITY, AND GOD.

            http://vinaire.me/2011/06/05/essay-17-zero-one-infinity-and-god/

            The resulting disturbance arises as the phenomena of awareness and electromagnetism, which are intimately related, and which form life.

            1. If you say than must be so… but that will remain your truth and those who believe in the same by agreement.. But collective agreements agreement not necessarily the truth.
              For the person who had that realization for that person is the truth the rest who went into agreement well they are followers.. because they could not come up with one lousy realization of their own but meanwhile they too have to have some kind of belief so they have adopted some other persons reality. Bah…

            2. theoretical means speculation guessing assuming hopping that it is so because other answer: the truth which is based on experience so far has not been found.. so those who are looking but not having found that experience these persons basically agree that assumption could be the truth but maybe not.. well… that sounds like when the weather man predicts a sunny day but includes in his statement ‘DO TAKE YOUR UMRELLA WITH YOU, JUST IN CASE” ! Theory is just that: assumption.

        1. You think? I never heard that expression from you before and I been reading your stuff for 3 years. Now that must be a very painful experience! My sympathies!

        1. Or maybe another look at the cycle of life, goes:

          could BE?
          should BE!
          WILL BE!!!
          AM!
          AM I?
          WHAT AM I?
          WTF?

          1. this cycle makes sense to me, if it’s life though isn’t death in there somewhere, maybe it goes death, wtf, then starts over, or maybe starts with wtf and ends in death? lol

            some might say death isn’t necessary for a spirit but if you consider life a game then it needs some possible end?

            if it never ended that would probably be a no-game condition, you’d have to label it something else

            1. someguy… since in auditing when ANY CONCEPT ITEM IS CONFRONTED it will as-is erases…vanishes.
              Now if one takes all the concepts what life is about example: conceived, born, baby, young, growing, teen, child, learning, adult, sex, kiss, love, work, food, sleep ETC…ETC ..ETC than aging wrinkles, old sicknesses, death etc… when the person erases all the concept what life is about, including cramps, taking in air etc… what that person has left? Immortality because that person will realise that life was just a bunch of pictures-consideration flowing into each other in one continual line and because they can be erased-as-ised they were nothing but illusions.. made up by the spirit..
              Only lies can be erased. The truth never… When the person erases the lies about having a life that is no longer a person but on Eternal who is aware of self and regained knowledge understanding and now Intangible-Infinite.

            2. Pretty good obnosis, someguy! Good old int/ext certain/uncertain, I know/don’t know (where/what I am)
              Will the person in this room that has NEVER been confused,
              … (WTF?),please put their hand up? 🙂

            3. Elizabeth

              the experience here is that one does not need to confront any other concept than the ‘ i ‘ concept to realize that one is
              intangible-infinite-eternal…
              this ‘ i ‘ takes space and position…when ‘space’ and ‘position’
              are confronted in one instant, the ‘ i ‘ is gone….

  4. SUMMARY
    Man has a composite structure like that of an object
    …..This structure of an object is composite down to the atom
    …..The structure of man is composite down to its soul or thetan
    Thetan is also made of a composite energy phenomenon
    …..There is a hard core, or nucleus, of energy
    …..Surrounding it, in a lower orbit or shell, is GE configuration
    …..Surrounding it, in a higher orbit or shell, is Thetan configuration.

    http://vinaire.me/2012/10/03/a-look-at-scientology/#comment-19271
    .

    1. The gods are pleased with your reality…[ they have informed me in person] how you have figured all that out is beyond my understanding but I am thrilled that it is not mine because than I would be back starting book one auditing all over again knowing I missed something…knowing I had a basic MU with the questions: I should have asked Do fish fry instead do fish fly!

    1. Have you any idea what is in reality the GE is? what causes the GE , who is this GE, what are they, why the GE is affective, how the GE works?
      Have you confronted these considerations and by doing that found the reason behind the existence of GE? I bet you have not.!!
      Go for mindfulness on the subject of GE.. or look over Davis ST Lawrence’s blog, read his founding’s or even better get some reality by having auditing on that subject.. now that alone would give experience and not some compiled assumptions you have gathered.
      Yes you got it right I am blowing your assumptions to smatterings, and that is easy to do because they are just collected assumptions wrapped into big words sounding so smart.

    2. The GE nothing more than on engineer another being more likely a whole group of beings running the body. they believe same as you that they are the body and they don’t realise that you too have the claim to that plus few million of other souls! You are all are in the co-up! owning one body! go read more material!

  5. Geir “Religion is the enemy of spirituality” you can bet your last penny on that and win big time.. Religion is a control mechanism and free can not be controlled! hehehe… so they employ fear. you will go to Hell my son if you…want to scare the shit out of you or if you be good fallow all the rules and be a good girl your reward will be in Heaven ! Oh geee! I wonder which implant is better.!
    Free will is when one do not need to choose.. or want to or have to choose or fallow any ones foot step, agree to teachings or rules in order belong or to be accepted. I could write few more considerations what free will means to me… In fact I don’t need to. 🙂

  6. Geir “If a basis for spirituality is free will, then any enforced will, any dogma is hurting spirituality.”‘
    For my self I take away the IF… and yes the rest is creation… My cat wants to play! talk later!

        1. cats by offering some soft sensations- sounds which are pure theta: void of considerations heavy energy mass and as humans we don’t have we cant emanate such we reach for that experience we hunger for the beauty of that sensation and willing to give support to have that magnificent in our space.

  7. Geir, you wrote: “Any set belief will hamper the fluid nature of the spirit. Religion is the enemy of spirituality, not science. Science is fluid in its search for truth as opposed to religiously dogmatic.”

    Hmmm, that might be a little too…dogmatic. 🙂

    Here’s an excerpt from an article titled “Upaya – Skillful Means”:

    “The Sanskrit word ‘upaya’ is usually translated as ‘skillful means’, ‘expedient means’, or ‘skillful methods’, and is a central concept in Mahayana Buddhism, which includes both Zen and Tibetan traditions. Upaya refers to practices, rituals, teachings, and even teaching methods that are considered a means to an end – a means to enlightenment – for a particular student or group of students. They are considered provisional or expedient truths rather than ultimate truth itself, on the pathway to enlightenment.

    “The Lotus Sutra, often considered the defining text of Mahayana Buddhism, discusses upaya in great detail, including the well-known ‘white lie’ story by the Buddha. In this story, the Buddha tells of a rich man with a large house and many young sons. A fire starts in the house, and the man is desperate to get all of his sons and staff out of the house as quickly as possible without causing a chaotic panic. He tells each son that their favorite toy is just outside and they need to rush to get it. All exit safely.

    “The Buddha’s teaching in this story is that the father telling his sons there are toys outside in this case is upaya, or skillful means, and actually a form of compassion, because it saves the children from suffering and even death. So too, a teacher’s methods, and the practices or rituals employed by certain traditions, even if unorthodox, may be skillful means if they are effective in leading someone from delusion towards enlightenment, and therefore rooted in compassion. The value of a teaching or practice is seen in its effectiveness, and is contextual, rather than being viewed in universal terms.”

    1. Marildi…. Geir “Any set belief will hamper the fluid nature of the spirit. Religion is the enemy of spirituality, not science. Science is fluid in its search for truth as opposed to religiously dogmatic.” Geir went further than what you right. that is my reality.
      To hinder a spirit is to believe in anything, soon as you have a belief of some kind that is the believers trap. We talked here in this blog about Enlightenment, can you recall? If one is working toward a goal and no matter how spiritual how smart, how light that goal is, still is a trap.

        1. Qoooooo thank you for letting me know.. I usually don’t drum for my blog because I believe those who need to read those cognitions I have had and written up will find the blog simply because they meant to read them. I do not believe in co-incidents. There are about 220 major basic-basic cogs I have had in the past 3 years.[few thousands beside what is in there] . My blog is written as a dairy.. simple,. how I see the Universe.. If you care to read please help your self.. But keep it in mind I do not speak for others and the knowledge I gained not from books written by others or videos-tapes. but cognitions from sessions. You can write any time endlesstringofpearls@gmail.com
          Best to you..Elizabeth

  8. My point is someone can call themselves scientist, spiritualist, religious, or a wtfwhocaresitsjustalabel and still try enforce their will on someone.

      1. yes it is, but religion accepts spiritual experiential truth

        science rejects it therefore the fluidity is solidified by accepting only phsyical proof

        they are both counter to free will to me but science is more solid than religion

        also most religions will unite when religious rights are violated, science could give a shit about religious rights, they want to usurp the whole subject but I can understand why given the history of abuses in religion but despite those mistakes we are still better off with freedom of religion imho, the day science destroys religion is the day a police state is born with worst a case of people being judged, classed, controlled and destroyed based on their dna, science would just assume to treat us as physical objects until the day they begin to accept and incorporate experiential truths

  9. To stop religion from hurting spirituality, I am starting a SPRITS SELF-LEARNING CENTER on my blog.

    This is similar to MATHS SELF-LEARNING CENTER, which alraedy exists on my blog.

    Here is the first entry of SPRITS SELF-LEARNING CENTER.

    OBSERVE WITHOUT HIDDEN EXPECTATIONS

    EXERCISE: Observe without expecting anything, or attempting to get an answer.

    1. Observe as usual. Notice the environment and other people.
    2. While observing, spot expectations that you have.
    3. Notice such expectations one by one. Let them be. Simply become aware of them, and then move on.
    4. Please note that expectations add extraneous thoughts.
    5. While observing, spot extraneous thoughts. Notice expectations underlying those thoughts. Simply become aware of them, and move on.
    6. Please note that uncontrolled thinking comes about when one is trying to predict what may happen tomorrow.
    7. While observing, spot uncontrolled thinking. Notice the possible scenarios the mind is trying to predict. Simply become aware of them, and move on.
    8. Please note that unanswered questions generate speculations.
    9. While observing, spot unanswered questions that you have. Notice the speculations that the mind might be entertaining. Simply become aware of them, and move on.
    10. Expand your span of attention and let the perceptions pour in.
    11. Let the realizations present themselves to you without you making any effort.

    You may do this exercise while sipping coffee in a café, or strolling along a river. You may even find a place where you can sit comfortably for a while without being disturbed and patiently observe the stage that this world presents.

    Develop this exercise to a point where you may execute it even while interacting socially with others. Keep observing patiently without expecting anything, or attempting to get an answer. Many things may come up naturally to be scrutinized. Simply observe them and become aware of them without making any effort.

    .

    1. i got it, the qeustion isn’t who are the enemies of free will

      to say science or religion are enemies of spirituality on the basis of free will is a generality, a wrong target, these are just byproducts of free will anyway

      the question is how do we protect free will without destroying free will?

      if we conclude religion is an enemy of free will and destroy that enemy, then what? we’ve just went to war on the basis of defending free will by destroying spiritual groups of people’s free will, the solution is the problem

      a better question would be: how do we determine which side to push when free will collides?

      1. Anything that enforces will, anything dogmatic is an enemy of free will. That includes most religions and perhaps Scientology inn particular. The more fluid, the more inviting of participation is the ally of free will. No need for any war, though. Simple ignoring will do just fine 🙂

        1. Oh sure… Yap… ignorance has worked so far so why not continue? hard to believe but I just read that and I can see why you do not believe in scientology recommend auditing for others or continue your self.

  10. The idea of friends and enemies, us and them is what Hubbard was obsessed about. This kind of approach is quite unproductive. One needs to take the whole systems approach to make progress.

    Free will is an aspect of the system. It is contrained to the degree it is determined. To the degree a person believes they know, to that degree their will is determined, and to that degree it is constrained.

    .

    1. Here you go, vinaire…. let’s just all simply cut to the chase, and park ourselves in eternal ‘mindfulness’ .There!..Will that help? 🙂

          1. Absolute means, “Viewed independently; not comparative or relative; ultimate; intrinsic.”

            This postulate may appear self-contradictory to some, but it essentially says, “There are no absolute certainties.” This is reflected in one of the most ancient hymns, The Creation Hymn of Rig Veda. A translation od this hymn is on my blog.

            All certainties are relative. This statement does not degrade any certainty we have. It simply means that one can always come up with a better certainty.

            That is how science makes progress. Einstein declared the speed of light to be a universal constant. This is a certainty for now, but there may possibly be a wider context in which the speed of light is a special case.

            Similarly, in the field of spirituality, we cannot be absolutely certain that self or soul is permanent. The phenomenon that is described as self or soul must be open to further investigation.

            There is no progress possible for a person who believes his certainties to be absolute.

            .

            1. So, a Clear and concise “yes” to the question that the statement may be uncertain. And restoring to an undehanded insult when I ask that the statement may be false (which follows from the conclusion that the statement is uncertain). Do you offer another logic, or are you happy with settling the discussion on an insult?

            2. So, do you agree that since the statement that there are no universal and absolute truths is uncertain, that it follows that it may indeed be false? Or do you offer another conclusion?

            3. Then I am afraid I do not understand your question. Could you please expand upon it further! Thanks.

              ________________________________

            4. It was very clear. Here it is again :you stated that there are no universal and absolute truths. I said that the statement must then be uncertain. You said yes. I then asked you three times now: Do you agree that the statement then may be false. Well, do you?

            5. I am sorry I still do not understand your question. You are asking for my agreement. In my opinion, that is asking for the wrong thing. 

              (1) One should be looking at the is-ness oneself. Your truth is your own despite what I say. 

              (2) To me, the is-ness is that nothing is absolutely certain. Any certainty that one has can be improved. 

              (3) It is fluid for me but it seems that you want me to make it rock solid by committing to an absolute answer. Your attempt comes close to constraining the other person’s free will. This is what Scientology tries to do.

              (4) If you have absolute certainty then please let me know. 

              We should be exchanging viewpoints and discussing them rather than attempting to constrain the other person’s free will. I am not trying to constrain your free will because I am not asking you to commit to some absolute answer.

              Thanks. Vinaire 

              ________________________________

            6. You already agreed that the statement is uncertain. To me it follows that the statement then CAN be false, otherwise it is certain and this an absolute and universal truth. How can you not see that.? If you don’t, please offer another conclusion.

            7. Geir, to have communication with someone, I would say that person has to have “the intention to communicate” – if there is any truth to this Awareness Scale:

              Aware of being aware

              Awareness of an environment as sufficient communication

              Knows of the existence of communication

              Communication with the intention to communicate

              Communication with significance with somebody else

              Communication with significance

              Communication with self with significance (worry) (Even here, some slight awareness that he is thinking a thought and communicating with the thought he is thinking)

              Unconsciousness (Absolute unconsciousness is, however, unobtainable)

            8. My other explanation is that being absolutely “logical” is a drawback. The absolute “logic” that you are trying to use here is unworkable in my view.

              The alternate method would be to have the answers come by themselves by putting oneself in a mindful mode. This would be similar to the TR0 mode.   Vinay 

              ________________________________

            1. At last! an “absolute and universal truth”
              you’re doing just great, btw, vinaire.
              How about another: Independent from matter, energy, space, or time?…………..?

            2. Okay, okay, vinaire, Got it! Exteriorization with full perception, simply did NOT occur for you, then ?

            3. I have experienced what is called exteriorization. My understanding of it, however, is different from the understanding in Scientology.

              ________________________________

          1. Yup. This exchange (for the lack of a better word) shows ptetty clearly that Vinaite is not interested in a discussion but rather to promote his own fixed conclusions. And when he feels an exchange is in some way threatening an already made up conclusion of his, then he back pales, side-tracks and throws in a red herring.

            But, it is good to have this “exchange” as a future reference.

        1. Just because you have not fount that universal truth because you are not aware if its existence. that do not mean that universal truth do not exist. you could not comprehend the universal reality till you are embroiled in the figure-figure.

          1. Especially, and because of that! Sigh, the interminable meanderings of misduplication! 🙂

          2. The ‘other’ side of the equation, offers some comfort from the compulsive figure-figure (thinking). It’s simply called ‘DOING’
            Yet another, is ‘LOOKING’ Both approaches at least, appear to offer ‘relative’ certainty. Hubbard defined ‘certainty’, as ‘clarity of observation’.

            I think where he made his mark, was in separating, the ‘knowable ‘from the ‘unknowable’. Otherwise, we end up just going round & round in circles forever, trying to figure-figure the unknowable.

            Another more cautionary observation made by Hubbard, was one of his defns of ‘sanity’—“The evaluation of importances in life.”
            …..from that, I gather that spending ones life in a constant pursuit of figure-figure, compromises one’s quota of ‘sanity.’ 🙂

  11. Something I’ve been meaning to do is go back and reread the axioms, factors, logics, prelogics but from the assumption I’m a pure thetan or static. In other words assuming you had a group of real operating thetans playing a game, what rules apply? basically what is different from this way of life to what we have? agreements in free will would become real, disagreements go where? they still exist but only for those that agree, would make an awkward game

    let’s say it’s football, I’m goally, I decide I get to have 6 arms, my team agrees and I now have 6 arms, but the other team doesn’t agree so they don’t see my extra 4 arms, suppose I blocked a goal with one of my extra arms? what’s the score? are there now two scoreboards, are they separate or interposed, two universes or one? wtf?

    here’s an amusing thought on how to protect free will without destroying it at the same time

    apply asimov’s laws of robotics to free will

    1 A being with free will may not injure a free will being or, through inaction, allow a free will being being to come to harm.
    2 A being with free will must obey the orders given to it by a being with free will , except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
    3 A being with free will must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

    would that work, are there loopholes?

    1. All 3 rules apply to humans human conditions , simply because those who have FREE WILL only can have free will if they are not boggled down by rules regulations, the possibility of injury, fear of injury, those who have Free Will do not know or understand or fallow conditions, or know the meaning how to obey and behave.
      You don’t have a clue what Free Will means, since you only know and live by rules and regulations and the order is the must!
      To know what Free Will means to truly understand that one has to step out of the structure.

      1. I found a clue, you need to reread my comment until you cognite that I was being humorous

        oh shoot I just leaked my confidential material… great now you’ll never get the gains I intended!

      2. Evaluate..invalidate! .. In some things, there is apparently no “will” to change either!… Like ARRRRGH! 😦

          1. Thank goodness yes! So again, GRRRRR, to you too! Hehehe!
            🙂 BTW, don’t you just love the pre-programmable floor levels. in this modern era, where you can travel to ANY tone you want, at the response of a touch on the touch screen?? .. WHIMPER…SOB…TREMBLE…HEHEHE….SNARL.. SNAPP!…TAKE THAT!…YAWN…CONTENT…. WELL HELLO!…
            GEE,THIS IS AMAZING!… WOW!!!… GETTONIT!.. WELL I”LL BE…CLOUD9…(and anywhere you wish to travel in-between..)
            …ps. a hearty pre-thank you for your ‘response’ of choice! 🙂

            1. Racer love ya back kid… when I read something like these my heart breaks into a song.. Now here use your imagination. a singing heart! and why not? recently I was called hysterical by one of the commenters in this blog the reason for that people cant imagine being outside of their own tiny cubicle where the emotions are limited so is the communication. They simply cant see that the infinite can be anything anywhere roar or purr, cry of laugh and all that can be in the same moment. I love the freedom the creations without boundaries.

            2. Atta girl!… Now, when all the other lights go out, please look and see, that this here shining star, (you) — doesn’t 🙂

            3. Pushed the wrong bloody button on this computer again! By the way I was just called insane I by Dio in Marties blog hehehe.. he has paid a great compliment that I see right were is wrong and wrong when is right! he placed me on zero on the tone scale and he is right every ways since when one is out the MEST U. become like upside down death of the body represent freedom and that is when one can leave the prison so death of the body should be on the top of the scale and pleasure moments[ very addictive] on the bottom with birth of the body since both are prisons for the Infinite. Anytime you ready we can go for a hot ride an a comet! no helmets required! 🙂

            4. racer… I have a friend her name is Tanaja she in size is bigger than a Milky Way of course she is a Comet and we go way back she is much fun and she eats! Star dust is her addiction! She would love to take us for a spin!

            5. Damn! That’s the spirit, Elizabeth, Who needs ’em anyway?
              Dunno if I’m quite ready for comets yet, though…. still have the ‘need’ to feel my knee scraping across the tarmac, you dig? 🙂

            6. I do, since I been there.. eraser do not means that the understanding the how too, how is is as-ised.. It simply means one is no longer the effect of…We cant erase the Universe we simply peel self off .. and we than look at things from afar . But when ever you are ready 🙂 my home base is the Crab Nebula you are welcome for a bit of different kind of fun 🙂

            7. Thanks, Doll! I’ll have to check some appointments up the line…….Still caught up in the ‘human’ format, and all it’s stupid trappings, at the moment…damn! But it really sounds intriguing, whatever that weird sounding experience is?
              Gotta get myself a bit more panel-beating, then I should be ready to take that ultimate leap of faith, hey? 🙂

  12. sorry… i am very wtf, deal with it! lol

    i like to ask and answer questions nobody really wants asked or answered

    check this out if you have the stomach, geir have you read bee’s work on free will?

    http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2014/01/10-misconceptions-about-free-will.html

    “If somebody talks about a “question that science cannot answer” what they really mean is a question they don’t want an answer to. Science can indeed be very disrespectful to people’s beliefs.

    Yes, I just blamed the missing rational discussion about free will for most of mankind’s problems, including quantum gravity.”

    and her free will paper

    http://arxiv.org/pdf/1202.0720v1.pdf

    geir you should take your free will paper to her, read hers then have some coffee and discuss free will with her, put it up on youtube

  13. wow, the logarithm of free will is 0 1 3 7 12 19

    google it, takes you to the equator right by the meridian, spooky

    this set x:y is [0:0, 1:1, 2:3, 3:7, 4:12 …]

    x=number of individuals
    y=number of realities

    so 3 individuals each get their own reality, 3 pairs and one collective, etc.

    that or my math is wrong and you can have a laugh

    if anyone wants to help in my rhetorical search for free will help me find the expression for this set

    1. How’s this for help? —What ever will be –WILL BE! (because “i” said so!) 🙂

  14. I can’t reply to elizabeth’s and some others’ posts above, maybe cause they’re from email

    you were debating absolutes or certainties, seems everyone considers it is absolute and certain that we are however you want to describe [sprit,free will,intangible,infinitepotential]

    in contrast to most scientists i’ve read papers on free will on, not all but most, think we are some physical particle of one type or another

    1. Some guy, if there isn’t any “Reply” button at the bottom of the comment you want to reply to, you have to use the “Reply” button at the bottom of the email notification for that comment.

      And if you’re not getting notifications, there’s a box you can check that says “Notify me of follow-up comments via email.” You’ll see it just below the comment box where you type your comment.

      As for those scientists who think we are some type of physical particle, that’s based on the assumptions of the religion known as science. 🙂

    2. someguy what I post is strictly my reality how I see the Universe and all my view are cognitions from sessions. I do not quote others. Lets go from these viewpoints. 🙂

  15. i accept quale as truth

    qua·le
    ˈkwälē/Submit
    nounPHILOSOPHY
    1.
    a quality or property as perceived or experienced by a person.

    most likely people will respond with free will or any other description of spirit as uncertain and not absolute because they rely only on physical proof and reject quale

    i don’t see why we shouldn’t treat measurements from the tool called a human with as much validity as we treat measurements of the physical tools we created such as electron microscopes, hadron collider, etc.

    after all we are in the end perceiving the measurements and that itself is just as uncertain as any measurement they declare as scientific, how are scientific facts not quale

      1. Consistency means ridged-ness solidity. figure-figure continually compare.. must have laws regulations, lines, wall. weigh-measure assumption. guessing which is right which is wrong, here it fits in..

        1. exactly, this is the root of the problem

          how is that mindful, you have to start with some arbitrary ideal scene to define what outpoints are, and have prior expectations to recognize an outpoint or inconsistency

  16. Those who are critical of my thinking here are prone to analyzing based on their premise. Analysis is based on logic. Rules of logic apply. Analysis doesn’t question the premise.

    But there is synthesis also. Synthesis is based strictly on observation. It bypasses rules of logic and premise. Observation is based on “seeing things as they are”. Observation is biased when it is filtered through expectations, speculations and assumptions.

    Buddha presented the concept of mindfulness to keep observation pure. Here are the 12 aspects of Mindfulness:

    1. Observe without expecting anything, or attempting to get an answer.
    2. Observe things as they are, without assuming anything.
    3. If something is missing do not imagine something else in its place.
    4. If something does not make sense then do not explain it away.
    5. Use physical senses as well as mental sense to observe.
    6. Let the mind un-stack itself.
    7. Experience fully what is there.
    8. Do not suppress anything.
    9. Associate data freely.
    10. Do not get hung up on name and form.
    11. Contemplate thoughtfully.
    12. Let it all be effortless.

    http://vinaire.me/2013/09/05/the-12-aspects-of-mindfulness-revised/

      1. I have never entertained a “holier than thou” attitude. But I have gotten interesting reactions to my way of thinking.

        ________________________________

        1. You may have noticed that you have received even more reactions to how you communicate and treat others. Or that may have slipped past you.

            1. V… you believe that is only one way, only one truth and that is yours. You have proved that by analyzing and correcting every well know famous scientist, philosopher pointing out in your blog that they are wrong and how it should be because you KNOW BETTER. but real proof you never offer that they are really wrong only words.
              Even with ”awarness” believing what you believe and preach you wont question because it is solidly imbedded that is the right answer -reality. You even made me wrong explaining it to me when I have repeated what you have written earlier! That was my proof when you have done that that you just cant face- confront any other belief than your own. Yours where you are at is none confront… because you want every one to think and belief in the same as you… that is safe.. that reality is OK. Joke.. but not very good.

          1. Yup! The individuated “ME vs. them” assumption, seems to preclude “ME” from a certain ‘lightness of being,’ which in turn, seems to prevent one from easily feeling part of a ‘team’. As a ‘team member’, the ARC flow, appears both fluid and productive of that ‘team spirit’ that is perceptibly uplifting, for each genuine team member.

            I’m pretty certain, that this (3rd Dynamic) awareness, remains out of the grasp of the ‘individuated ME’, while that individuation is in play.

            Anyone who has served as a ‘coach’ whether ‘just’ for TR-‘s, or as a professional, (such as both you, Geir, and me), may have a good reality on this point.Of course, we have then taken up a viewpoint as ‘pan-determined’. The awareness of persons who manifest ‘team spirit’, are naturally seen as ones who ‘fit in’.

            Those who do not, are perhaps regarded as ‘too problematic’, to be a team member, and suffer rejection, or worse, as a result.

            Fortunately, as we know, remedies do exist, that can resolve even this ‘departure’ from the ‘ideal scene’.

            Yep, SOMEtimes all it takes, is the willingness to just fully ‘duplicate’, for AS-IS’ness to occur!

            “ARC” — Calvin 🙂

            1. Calvin, are you still on the team of Church of Scientology, or individuated from it?

              ________________________________

            2. —Resigned from ‘it’ –Reunited with ‘sanity’ 🙂

            3. C…. do you really believe that one kind of believe has more value , more important than other different view? If so please explain.. Now if you are looking from the human view or spiritual view.. but don’t mix both into one put that alone causes confusion.

            4. To Elizabeth. I ‘believe’, the only one to ‘give value’ or importance, to anything in the whole ball of wax (including views), is simply ‘you’, the being! 🙂 Human or spiritual, the only options?
              What about–the bigger picture–including, the other 6 Dynamics?

              L. Ron, gave a real little gem, once, when he explained his ‘view’ on JUDGEMENT. “…For a long time, I pondered on this subject: “judgement:” The other day, I finally figured out what is was:
              “How many Dynamics, can one compute with, instantly?”
              (–from an excerpt in The clearing Congress DVD)

            5. C.. there are no levels, segregation, groups, higher or lower… or here or there, outside or inside etc… these are considerations I no longer go by, use as a focal point to measure from, judge by.

            6. Yeah, you’re right of course, Elizabeth! But I’ll be dammed if someone doesn’t show up in your face, sprouting that:
              “Its too blah! I ordered something more rah!”
              or, “Look, I don’t know what your problem is, but I think you need a new pair of glasses, ma’am. You’ll NEVER fit into that dress!!!”
              or, “Bow down unto HIM, pay your bucks, and weep no more!”
              or, “Pull over sir/(ma’am). Do you realize you were speeding?
              or, “You haven’t paid your rent!!! Where is it???”
              or, “Sorry, your health insurance has lapsed!”

              Get the gist of this? If we DON’T use SOME eval of importance
              and /or judgement, we can end up in really DEEP doggy-do!

              Of course, this stuff is totally irrelevant, if you are out of the mainstream, and living on Nebula 🙂

            7. C… I am very aware that without evaluation. agreed on valued, judgements one can not survive or be the part of this society.
              Has to be part or else.. or will be segregated.

            8. C… PS…. also becomes irrelevant when one erases the effects but still have to fallow the rules long as one has attachment to the body here and do not have to move house to the other part of the universe in order to have different reality and partake in different lifestyle.. and one can look at this Planet from distance, and do not have to be embroiled in conditions and agreements: in other word one do not need to take side.

            9. hi ray,

              how about this: a being as a ‘me’ realizes that this ‘me’ is a source
              as well as a ‘bunch’ of ‘affinity’ lines…may even realize that all
              other beings are that…these lines are flowing out of the ‘me’ sources as well as the one Source ..so we get
              the web-of-affinity lines…this may be the end of any ‘versus’…

            10. Thanks for that Marianne. To me, ‘versus’, is little more than a games condition, and boy oh boy! most of us have a BIG blind spot on that! 🙂 I firmly believe that staying ‘in present time’ is about the best means to stay alert to what is happening to, or around one! LOL. No ‘bodyguard’ could function otherwise! 🙂

  17. On religion, is it fair to say that the ‘dogma’ starts out as tips an advice from person one to person two on how to achieve a state that person one has and that person two wants?

    1. This part is very interesting (the context must be understood from the book above):

      The processes countering Xenu’s schemes were named the “OT levels”, ranging from OT I to OT III. (Further OT levels, for different purposes, were developed later.) Doing the OT levels was comparable to joining the partisan army, the guerrilla, and going to war. One didn’t do it for “casegain” (i.e. to feel better personally) but for “clearing the planet”. One felt sworn in to a common supra-individual cause. To start with, the OT levels were only delivered on the Flag Ship. The battle cry of the Sea Org was: “first this planet, then this sector of the galaxy, then the universe.”

      Naturally, rehabilitating one’s higher spiritual dimensions has positive and pleasant aspects, such as conversing with wellmeaning beings in spheres outside the physical universe, reestablishing connections with friends of ages ago who one thought were lost to one but in fact happen to live on this planet, too, and experiencing the coming and going of representatives of peaceful powers. They aren’t all bad, out there, after all. The above Sea Org motto reveals, however, how much such positiveness had become sacrificed to a fighting mentality of “we are the only ones, the knights in white armour, the cavalry rescuing the fort”. – Even though this mentality- in the light of the events to come – might be considered justified, it still put an ungoodly bias on the attitudes the staff identified with.

      To the public things were made to look different. The longer the term OT was used for marketing and sales purposes the more its original meaning was twisted; eventually it came to mean something like a boosted-up version of superman. Those believing in this version of the word hoped to gain wondrous powers by doing the OT levels I to III, like walking on water, lifting objects by sheer intention, creating things out of thin air. They projected all their magic fantasies into this legend-embroidered state of OT. Of course, the disappointment was great. But as church registrars always were very skilled, as the public always was ready to believe that their dreams would finally come true, and as “ethics officers” always made very sure that no word about anyone’s frustrations would leak out, the OT levels sold very well. “Going OT” – that meant finding the holy grail, attain enlightenment, disappear in some glorious nirvana. In the CofS, it is advertised in this manner up to the present day.

      1. i don’t know if this is authentic but it’s a good sci fi story of zenu, supposedly a movie script lrh wanted to produce but he or someone changed his mind? perhaps he intended to release it originally

        https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Scientology_cult_%22Revolt_in_the_stars%22_(circa_1975)

        you got it right for the most part, seems like a personal interest either lrh thought he was a loyal officer or perhaps making amends, to say EVERYONE has this incident on his track is quite a statement, how would you know this unless you can read everyone’s mind?

        however they do advertise their darker side, what is ridiculous is the church denies zenu and ridicules it yet reveals content in advertisements such as this, i’ll paste it cause they’ll probably remove this webpage

        http://newerapub.com/rd/the-infinite-potentials-of-theta.html

        Ron explains in Volume 10,

        “You see, most of you are Crew One—MEST universe Crew One. And this is the final dumping ground. Earth’s a sort of a prison. You’ve been on the track for about 60 trillion years. You’ll find other crews mixed up here. These are designations to which people answer up, by the way, who have been here much shorter periods of time, like 3 trillion years, something like that.” – LRH

        Do YOU have a body in pawn? Read Volume 10, for once you know ALL about it, you won’t have to worry about nightmares, inexplicable somatics, disturbing visio images of cylindrical tanks, bodies floating in green fluid…

        The Composite You
        Handwritten Dianetics JinglesThe handwritten Dianetics Jingles are found in this volume (sample shown)
        (click image to enlarge)
        A body has millions of cells each with their own beingness, that collectively, you call “you.” And there are facsimiles and mental machinery, and these are also “you.”

        There are other things in a human being, namely the entities—separate theta bodies each with their own personality that are permanently incorporated into any human being. The entities are antipathetic toward you. In DMSMH, they were called “demons.” Discover the anatomy of YOU in Volume 10!

        (end)

        so it’s not completely hidden but yes it’s presented all nice and shiny and fun and free and friendly then inside it gets crazy, it’s jekyl and hyde all the way

        what is the church going to do is my question? pr nightmare, confidential materials can be pulled up on a phone, growing list of enemies they create by abusing ex members blogging, billions in the bank, nobody will be left on earth soon that hasn’t heard of zenu, there’s audio of lrh talking about it easily found

        obviously they don’t care about delivering the bridge anyway because 99% of earth can’t afford their rates anyway so it hardly matters

        but it’s ok to talk about this content, bodies in pawn, theta bodies, etc. at the church but if you bring up zenu or call them body thetans instead of theta bodies they freak

        so the church actually publicly advertises theta bodies with their own personalities, turns around and denies body thetans, lol

        where did the theta bodies referred to in their own ad of vol 10 come from? if not zenu where? 60 million year old space crews exist according to you but not zenu, oh no that’s all lies being made up to destroy us!!!

    2. @qooo that’s exactly what i think about dogma

      @vinaire are you going to share your realization or is this confidential material, or do I have to spend 30 years/$300k on it cause if that’s the case I’ll hang out with those ex guys on a blog… lol

      you seem confident with your techniques, i don’t see a problem with that, i assume you can handle our reactions, I might try your techniques if i can understand them

      @geir here is something to consider, suppose science is supported, religion is declared enemy (ignored and fades away) and free will is proven to be the origin of reality as you suggest in your free will article

      now not just a unification theory is completed but now science has an origin theory in their hands, instead of religion fading away it would become a subset of science

      what makes you think they would not create dogma and dictate how free will is used for the purposes of forwarding their group? what would they do with it? possibly things like alter gravity, reinforce conservation of energy, decide how they want the higgs particle or dna to behave, make better weapons and spaceships, solve global problems, but if free will is real and consideration creates reality then people are considering the things they wanted to create, what if someone really wants some medical or physical issue to make their life more challenging?

      science is mostly funded by corporations, governments, they use it as a tool to develop toys and technology for mostly profit, consumption, energy and war, some medical but medical research by nature is for profits in treatment not cures, drugs, equipment, etc.

      i think the question is not how can we stop anyone from making dogma but how and in whose hands do we want free will controlled? are we really going to have 0 rules, no dogma whatsoever, everyone totally free to anonymously do anything possible spiritually with no responsibility? actually in that scenario free will could create less responsibility than if free will doesn’t exist and our actions are predetermined

      not even dogma protecting the exercise of free will itself such as in free speech, equality, etc.?

      free will might be the only enemy of free will, individuals interacting can’t do anything but create dogma or violate others’ free will without limiting their exercise of free will

      sorry that’s so long it’s stream of consciousness… I think I’m on the right track though, feel free to correct me on what sounds ridiculous

    3. Vinaire, LRH wasn’t the only one who perceived an ongoing “Star Wars.” In fact there has been a very long tradition of this view in cultures all over the world. Here’s a pretty good summary in this 12 1/2 minute video:

      1. Yes, it is fascinating indeed. The focus of OT Levels is not on individual case gain. The focus of OT Levels is on creating a regimented structure with which to fight external influences. Hubbard saw these external influences as a great threat to him and his universe.

        That is exactly what is happeneing in the current Church of Scientology.

        1. Agreed, Vinay. BTW, I read L. Kin’s works a while back. Quite frankly, the OT material left me in little doubt that a few marbles had been lost out of the bag, somewhere. The incredibly succinct summaries of the grades, tech, and ethics, were an outstanding rendition, however! 🙂

          1. Don’t knock it till you truly experience something… that alone is on indication of ignorance on the matter!
            One major mistake belief LRH had about OT material and further use of the auditing Technology and continuation with solo auditing that the use-continual sessions produced FREE BEINGS AND NOT SLAVES!.. In sessions one erases ideas compulsions like group agreements, and beliefs and the need to fight wars.
            V… believes now that he is finally right.. his believes are now solid facts and this article truly justify that everything about scientology is what he wanted to believe [totally negative ]in the first place since he never had one good experience while in the SO.
            Yeh.. C… you just joined the ”ignorant” group… where the leader only preaches negative..hurray for you all!

            1. My dearest Elizabeth, Do you remember that smash hit: “Girls just wanna have fun”. ?? —Well, IMHO, that is some pretty ‘sane advice’. Life is short, you know, so it’s not a bad philosophy. Works for me too! 🙂

            2. C…. I am out… I don’t see this planets activities as fun but the nature here beautiful yes.. in fact breathtaking. C.. you haven’t been in my blog so you don’t have reality what my viewpoints are. I have had the grades adventure any one can create.. this life cycle was my greatest the best I have had since I entered into this Universe. Thank you for your kind advise but you see, my dream is now reality.:)

  18. Hubbard stated, “If you think for a moment that its the purpose of Scn to produce something intensely spectacular like a ghost that can move cigarette paper or mountains, you have definitely gotten the wrong idea. We are interested in well men, we are interested in people with well bodies, who can think straight, and who co-operate on optimum solutions. We are not making magicians.” “We are not trying to achieve the certainly of mysticism, necromancy, or, to be blunt, the Indian ropetrick. We are trying to make sane, well beings.”

    But Hubbard promoted OT Levels as “the Indian rope trick,” and made people expect intensely spectacular results, knowing that to be not the case. I think Hubbard’s justification was that he needed money to counter Xenu’s influence on this planet.

  19. One should first recognize one’s innermost certainties. That is the prerequisite and it is very important.

    But that is not enough.

    After recognizing one’s innermost certainties, one must now go beyond them to make spiritual progress.

    1. To me it seems that “absolute certainty” and even “absolute” harbors the assumption that any part of this universe can be held still for a moment. But it cannot unless for a moment so brief that except for mathematically, physically we are a very long way yet from discovering. The universe seethes and roils. For my money, we will get further toward understanding if we pay attention to grasping the magnitudes of forces and of vectors and of fractal shapes and dimensions than by wishing for absolutes. All of our best physics seems to be along this line of thought and discovery.

      1. Scientists have the prove that everything no matter how it looks like what kind of material it is made of, how dense, or thin, made of flesh or solid as jade it is made out of the same energy.. .
        So the question is what makes it solid.. if it is not solid in reality?
        Well… the belief…the agreement by every person who resides on this Planet, we have on agreement and that agreement even we know it is on illusion but we keep that belief there solidly therefore we have solidity.
        This proofs that large amount of agreement can keep the major untruth -fiction seems to be true, and persisting… yet it is only on illusion that solidity – hardness is real and it can resist other mater to enter into its body.
        There is no solidity that concept is a consideration and it is on illusion and so is the rest which is built on that illusion.

  20. found this quote from the video I linked above

    Michio Kaku — ‘Physicists are made of atoms. A physicist is an attempt by an atom to understand itself.’

    is this science? or is that a belief/religion? i’ve never heard of an experiment that verified we are an atom?

    and on the flip side it would be? ‘spiritualists are made of a potential cause, spirituality is an attempt by a potential cause to understand itself.’

    poses a problem, if all we are is potential cause, immaterial, infinite, free, what is there to understand other than that? only to find out how we forgot, do we need someone’s process to cautiously or entertainingly guide ourselves back into realizing that state that we cannot change, to pay out the nose so it feels like it’s worth it, only to come back to knowing and feeling we are something so free and untouchable that we considered it something we should forget about?

    and re: zenu, now even the UN is assuming authority over space opera matters
    http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2010-09/27/alien-ambassador

  21. Many people have “out-of-body” experiences, which they fondly remember for the rest of their lives. Such experiences are never under one’s control. They cannot be consciously repeated. Usually they do not repeat on their own either. A big deal is made out of “out-of-body” experiences in Scientology. In fact, Scientology has made itself a big $$$ “church” by exploiting this phenomenon.

    .

    For most people, body is an intimate part of their self. The Scientology command, “BE THREE FEET BACK OF YOUR HEAD” may simply serve to jar, momentarily, one’s fixed attention on the body. It may give one a glimpse of what it is like when the attention is not fixed on the body.

    This command may not have any effect on a person whose attention is too fixed on the body, or whose attention is not fixed on the body in the first place.

    Those who are affected by this command may believe that they have suddenly separated from the body and are ‘exterior’ to it. In actual case there is only a shift in viewpoint of the person. He didn’t even know how fixed his attention was on the body.

    Scientology uses strange vocabulary, such as, ‘thetan’ and ‘exteriorization.’ It believes that the person is a spiritual entity, called ‘thetan’, which has separated itself from the body, called ‘exteriorization’. But what has actually happened here is a relief from fixation on the body. This sudden relief may be surprising, but soon that feeling of ‘exteriorization’ is gone.

    Only a memory of that feeling remains. But it is enough for people to wanting to keep going up the Scientology “bridge”.

    http://vinaire.me/2014/05/01/thetan-and-exteriorization/
    .

    1. In fact, spirituality, is just a part or section of the ” spiritual ” reality. Spiritual reality has a lot more to do with personality and connection with the surrounding persons than with spacation and its phenomena leading straight to entrophy.

  22. From the following comments it appears that Hubbard
    (1) Didn’t want monopoly on Dianetics techniques
    (2) Wasn’t interested in being considered the “source”

    But he seems to have changed “spiritually” as he progressed up the bridge.

    From L. Kin’s book 1 on Scientology:

    In contrast to the current CofS management Hubbard himself didn’t think it was a good idea to monopolize his techniques. In “Dianetics” he says: “Dianetics is not in any way covered by legislation anywhere for no law can prevent one man sitting down and telling another man his troubles, and if anyone wants a monopoly on ~, be assured that he wants it for reasons which have to do not ~ dianetics but with profit.”

    As well in “Dianetics”, Hubbard even asks scientologists to assist him in the future improvement of scientology methods: “In or a hundred years the therapeutic technique which is offered in this volume will appear to be obsolete. Should this not prove to be the case, then the authors faith in the inventiveness of his fellow man ~ not have been justified. (. . .) The application methods cannot but be refined. All sciences begin with the discovery of basic axioms. They progress as new data is discovered and as the scope of the science is widened. Various tools and techniques rise up continually, improved and re-improved. The basic axioms, the initial discoveries dianetics are such solid scientific truths that they will be altered but little. (. . .)” He ends on the words: “In this handbook we have the basic axioms and a therapy which works. For Gods sake, get busy old build a better bridge!”

    1. Akin to the Christian Trinity of “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,” The consensus at LRH ARCHIVES was that the materials themselves were SOURCE. This gave structure to SOURCE regardless of the whereabouts of LRH. This was the way that reference was used in the stronghold of the Church of Spiritual Technology – CST.

Have your say

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s