What if you at your core is “potential will”? And as you start to exercise that potential, you create. You create and add to the game of life. Each creation is an expenditure of your potential – of your will. You trade potential will for actual experience. The more you cumulatively affect, the more affects you. And what if you actually create every experience you have at every instance? Not that you necessarily create everything that is – but every effect it has on you.
It’s like a game of soccer. You stand outside the field watching other players. You decide to pitch in. At the instance you join the game, you are subject to a set of rules. The only way to not be affected by the rules is to leave the game. But as long as you decide to play, your will is limited by the rules. And the more agreements you enter into – such as formations and your position in the team, the less free will you have left.
Like in business. You start off with two bare hands and a brilliant idea. You have a whole vista of opportunities. As you create the company, you add substance, but at the same time you relinquish your range of possible choices. You trade free will for focus, for creations. And the more you create, the more you own. But what you own also owns you. It takes a hold of your freedom.
You expand your company, adding people, products, processes and partners. Company rules, regulations and bureaucracy. And limitations to your free will. When Facebook was a startup… when HP or Apple was garage companies, the founders had lots of ideas and much free will. But as the companies expanded, their freedom within that game diminished. To regain freedom, they could pack up and do something else.
What if this is how it is on all levels in life?
What if you create every thought and every emotion you experience? Every high, every nightmare. What if all you had to do to not have the nightmare was to “wake up” – to stop creating those thoughts, those fears?
Maybe the idea of others being responsible for your thoughts, emotions or actions is limiting your own free will? Maybe your assigning your responsibilities to others is you “digging your own grave”. Perhaps this is why “letting go” works so well. Simply saying “fuck it” to the blame, shame and regret – and just not creating those haunting thoughts, those painful emotions anymore.
Adding structure limits freedom, adding policies limits choices and adding complexities limits potential.
These musing could funnel four valid therapies to regain one’s freedom in any area:
- Just “letting go” and say “fuck it” to the limitations you yourself create
- Spotting the fact that you create those thoughts, those emotions in order to be able to “let go”
- Exercising “liking” a situation or at least your own created feelings regarding a negative situation
- “Exposure training” where you force yourself to do the opposite of creating the limitations
The last point would encompass the exposure to spiders for the person suffering from arachnophobia or skydiving if you are afraid of heights. Research show that 2-4 exposures to your fears per week will “wear it out”. You would expose your fear on a gradient – to challenge the unpleasant feeling of fear increasingly until it subsides. It is important to not overdo it or make the challenge insurmountable. It’s like lifting weights to build your bodily strength.
My experience in coaching hundreds of people in life is that these therapies tend to work better than regression or “looking inward into your mind”.
It boils down to “doing what helps” and “not doing that which doesn’t help” in any given situation. Creating feelings of “stress” or “panic” or “rage” may not be very helpful in a certain situation. If you looked at the situation calmly you may come to the conclusion that there are other, more helpful feelings that you could have created instead.
Living in the present, not delving into the past or living in the future, that is a key to happiness. But if you realize that you are able to create any thought and any emotion, you really don’t need any means or any excuses to be happy. Just create happiness. It takes training to do so when life is inviting you to create other emotions. It may be hard to create a happy you when you are stuck in the dentist’s chair. But instead of giving away your key to your thoughts, emotions – your life… training and exercise will eventually get you there – taking control of your own thoughts, emotions – your life.
Geir Isene - uncut 
Awesome post, Geir! This is one is really awesome. I enjoyed it every word.
Your HP is 10 cm near my laptop keyboard. Give me please just couple of days more to find that movie for Anette. If I’ll fail again, I will try something else and I’ll ship everything on the end of this week 🙂
Np 🙂
YOUR LIFE!
Winning or Losing? Having or Not?
Winning= win= victory, susses, triumph, conquests, gain, achievement accomplishment, completion, conclusion, good ending.
Losing=loss=defeat, failure, downfall, overthrown, down and out, let down, disappointed, frustrated, unfulfilled, dejected? That too is from failure.
The above subjects and many more different thoughts which were in connection to these were taken into session by me and thorough scrutinized, examined=confronted by that I mean they were taken every one of them EARLIER –SIMILAR had realization on them why were they created: postulated into existence in the first place.
I have done the above in the past 40 years tens of thousands of solo auditing hours because winning-losing this subject is huge successively covers every aspect our life’s: WE MAKE IT: GET WHAT WE WANT OR WE DON’T: LOSE OUT TO THE OPPOSING POSTULATE: NOT TO HAVE and settle back into failure which by now accepted as normal human condition.
Of course we always have justifications handy why what we wanted did not happen and that justifications those reasons why are the sugar-coating on our failure=can’t make it come through.
And of course by now we become masters with compromises how to settle and ‘be happy’’ with what the life dole out for us.
The winning, is not just with the Lotto ticket, or the card game, on the horse race etc… but with jobs, attaining our dreams to become singers, or dancers, the best news reporters, of simply hybridise a the blue rose, or fly in the air, walk through the walls. Or get that parking spot every time!
These dream, our illusions where in them everything is possible to attain to do, where we are free to create and with that to have we are capable, not restricted by any barriers, nothing but nothing can hold us… we are the masters in our dreams here we are never defied.
I truly believed from the beginning when I gotten into Scientology that no matter what my realities were they can become, and not only in my ‘’head’’ but they can materialise in the MEST Universe too and can be experienced.
My beliefs were the reason I never stopped solo auditing and relentlessly continued with eliminating millions of barriers-walls which all are counter postulates-wishes not to let materialize- come about what I wanted.
As I written: I have had thousands of session on these consideration of winning-losing-getting –failures etc.. and yesterday I found something which has blown off immense amount of charge and this different understanding brought optimism.. New faith.. Positivity that yes I was right we all can have what we visualise but of course the barriers=counter intentions must be eliminated once and for all.
I have seen in this recall that we were doing repeated EXARCISES under the guidance- direction of a person who was ‘’helping us’’ IN ORDER NOT TO HAVE OUR VISIONS-THOUGHTS-materialise because we were told by him and we believed: by having them make us SOLID-DENSE: that we become just that ‘’dense material’’ therefore we can’t be free long as we have anything.
And by doing the exercise till we perfect it and that is not having our imagines-illusions wishes materialize no matter how hard we wish them to happen with that we will become free and remain free and nothing could touch us again, keep us within the walls of our illusions-dreams=our havingness.
I also recognised behind the instruction-tutoring the evil intention of the most foul kind I ever experienced; CONTROLER of the most affective kind: tell you something what is good yet that ‘’good’’ only serves him and by that he is in control.
Failure as on options were never ever acceptable by me regardless what they were: illness, old age, car accidents, so called marriage failures=relationships, not coming out as they were intended.
To me, I knew whatever they were and how I experience them-lived them they were postulated existence and nothing more.
who is that tutor-controller you recalled ?
who postulated ‘him’ into existence?
Marianne… you can find that one out your self if you care to do so.. But that is a very good question… all I know that he was AUTHORITY FIGURE..
What is the difference knowing that? I have erased that incident by recognition and all those who were involved -included in that are now released: they are no longer being effected and that is the point with auditing-confronting., that is the winning item: the eraser.
thank you eliz. isn’t there a confusion before an ‘evil’ intent?
..from what you write eliz what i see is that you have written down
‘Creation’s’ purpose, intent itself, which is an ongoing ability to
create illusions but never get caught-stuck in them…as then ‘one’
as having that purpose oneself is and will ever be ‘free’ of becoming ‘dense’…so i see these ‘exercises’ as the Power of
Life-Source Creator itself, ‘excercising’ its Free Will of Creating…
..it is the ‘auhor’ity (originator) of the ‘figures’…
MT.. do not kid your self.. we are gotten cut with those intentions!
Can something appear front of your eyes I mean what you can touch by your hand feel them, smell them see them with your eyes? Let say can you create the house-car, money in the bank or the man by your side? Can you change the weather at your will?
Can you be by my side, or be in the palace of the greatest treasures, or underground and see-feel experience even detail? can you come here leave that body there and make one over here front of my eyes for me to experience too and I too could touch it?
I don’t believe you can.. no one can do that on this planet and therefore there is NO FREE WILL, none existing.
Yes, because you cant do that, I cant do that therefore we are the victim of those past creations and very much locked into them. We are the prisoner’s of our past and the freedom that you are free and you can do anything that is your illusion-make believe they exist because that what we can live with.. if those would not be by now your believe than you simply would go mad.
” . . . therefore we are the victim of those past creations and very much locked into them.”
Maybe, or maybe we haven’t seen things as they really are.
Far as I am concerned, what I believe in, I know that I don’t, and how others perceive their universe that is their belief. and welcome to that.
” . . . if those would not be by now your believe than you simply would go mad.”
What I see are ideologies like Scientology driving people mad. It is not necessary to allow ideologies into our lives and allow them to take over our thinking for us.
whatever.. don’t make much difference to me what people believe in.. one think I know that my reality has nothing to do with ” scientology” never has been and never will be.
are you so sure that no other persons outside of scientology affect your thinking:like:news media, signs you read on boxes, side of the roads, teachers of the past who thought you what values were, laws of the country which control your behavior and other factors;which has thought you outside of scientology what is good and what is bad. The deep seated fears which control every human being and dont tell me they dont hold you in their grip at all time!
“are you so sure that no other persons outside of scientology affect your thinking:like:news media, signs you read on boxes, side of the roads, teachers of the past who thought you what values were, laws of the country which control your behavior and other factors;which has thought you outside of scientology what is good and what is bad. The deep seated fears which control every human being and dont tell me they dont hold you in their grip at all time!”
As you say, this is your reality, not mine.
MT… what I find most fascinating that bloggers on these and other scientology sight believe that by reading they will find the answer to questions which were asked by millions over the past centuries and by doing so: understanding the meaning of those answers they have reached the enlightenment: become free of the MEST.. So far that has not happened no matter what the belief are.
EH…thank you for your answers…this is the first time that i say
this on this blog: your coms contain too many concepts for me
to reflect just in one back-com.
It seems you are looking for different understandings, the ones you have now are restricting confining your abilities.
You have said in your earlier posts you have done some processes which helped you to eliminate your introversion shy-ness which were the restricting barriers in your life and with those gone and were replaced by totally different viewpoints and these new attitudes in place allowed you to create a transformed existence: life.
You have grown into those abilities-realities gained than, than you pushed the boundaries of those realities far as possibly could be done, but now those walls become too confining once more.
Fuck-it attitudes only work momentarily.. and if it would really work than you would not have written this post.
Evaluation? yes, you have asked and this is my reality on your post and I believe you know the answers to your question. Hehehe, we can only assume what is needed, but you know since it is your universe.
elizabeth
My shyness was not handled by any regression or “looking into my mind” or any such therapy. It was handled by drilling communication. And any gain I had with “inward looking” therapies could as easily (or even more easily) been handled with more direct approaches (one of the 4 approaches listed in this blog post). And – the “fuck it” attitude is IMO the only approach that works – other approaches are “vias” or indirect approaches that facilitates a “fuck it approach”. The stuff that doesn’t bother you today is not bothering you precisely because you have a “fuck it approach” toward those things. You may not think about that (and that IS the essence in the approach). You have “let go”. And to me it seems very non-momentarily.
good to know, more view points! thank you. what i have written was on assumption., what i read into.. but these assumptions are my own, how i see your views is my reality i cant possibly know yours.. duplication, the meaning of words concepts how they were meant to be is impossible.
if fuck-it works and brings you enlightenment than hallelujah! this subject is not my reality and never will be, but one thing for sure your admirers will use it.
“never will be”… Why?
the fuck-it approach to problems: the unwanted is been around for a long time. it is not a new method, it do not erase –as-is anything but pushes that bothersome problem aside for a while, but that problem will surface sooner or later.. that is a fact.. so in scientology that person called LRH invented-coined a word for what Fuck -it do ” NOT _ISSING. . my reality and I like it.
“the fuck it attitude” is certainly not LRH’s “not-isness”. I think you don’t get what the attitude is. Our marine you are looking at it through a scientology filter?
Ok… I use a filter and that is your belief. Ok by me… use a word what ever it suits you, that is still burying, pushing aside.. if I would have used the fuck-it attitude and live it as is in 96 and just ignored the problem which was brought on by head an collision I would be vegetating in wheelchair with collapsed spine.
Teach starving children, or jobless persons to fuck-it = their situation, you want more examples? I have a friend who had 29 operation before he could walk.. to bad you were not around to teach him to ignore those painful operations by not having them and just walk.. I don’t buy …
You don’t get it. The fuck it attitude is not about ignoring… at all. It’s about letting go, no clinging, no attachment, no resisting . Simply not creating the shot that bothers you. Etc.
But I do get it.. since I have used it in some occasions. But I have found it that by looking something right at and see what it is than that what ever it may be do vanishes for ever. just goes puff!
There are many side to each coin.. not just two..
But Fuck it works for you that way but do you have any idea-reality how the same wording works for others? example for those who have had very little auditing and they look at you like some kind of god because you are OT8? Teaching is a big responsibility because we do not know what results we will achieve with the ideas we pass to others. By the way what shot I am not creating.. would that be agreement? Hehehe.. brother you been reading my posts thousands of them as 3 years this month and I have posted many basic-basic cognitions from sessions I have had but it seems you have not read them or if you have you did not duplicated any. Acknowledgement what is in reality was one of them. I know what they do not just ack. the arriving communication. that part is irrelevant.
If you understand fully that the attitude does not equate to ignoring, then you get it.
I am not in your shoes.. I have no idea, cant see how those words do what they do for you and therefore I cant say they are right or wrong… I only know how they work for me.. now if my wish could come through for 1 minute I would ask to let me have your understanding on the matter so we than could share the very same knowledge, 🙂
same goes for you, if you would understand that is sweeping under the carpet than you would get what I mean, my reality. soooo there you go…:)
before I started to post here I was told by some one who knows you” take care, you might run into opposition since his been known to be a mule” hehehe my answer was ” that is Ok by me since those who know me they know I am a pure breed mule. totally one track mined..”” and some other mule said I this” never compromise your reality” I like that. 🙂
”-Acknowledgement” has great power, one of the major solidifier of MEST Universe. Something has been bothering me of late on unknown energy floated about which I have not confronted yet. Pulled my attention, it was my reality that I real did not liked to be appraised or do the same to others. Either way I was not comfortable with it.
Finally I got it, “ACKNOWLEDGEMENT”. They had stimulated me in many different way..
That very words: good, yes, fine, well, done, OK as ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS do drives a stake like anchor point into the center of the beings universe with that further solidifies the CORE=bank.
An acknowledgement might confer one is good, doing well and that acknowledgement is the signal that the person should continue going on the agreed upon considerations, action, since what one is doing is approved by others who usually is close to us and love or likes us. In other words agree, have similar reality level as ours and we look up to these persons with love and admiration and value they opinion, reality and believes.
These acknowledgements are dangerous because it anchors “the created energy” and holds that created energy in place between two persons with that energy established that communicated subject become collective, group agreement, example: which politicians view point pro survival therefore better so lets vote for: that vote=acknowledgement solidifies his position in space he is in office for 4 years. Furthermore in the future all his communication will get further acknowledgements, more invisible energy lines will be created by the confirmation.
Solid they become and remain: law is born.
Same with any other acknowledgement, which we are giving or given by others to us, we too are tied to that being with an invisible line.
That communications=acknowledgements hold that concept in the MEST Universe, Period, therefore has solidity in form of energy.
With the so called times passing both will be forgotten, but the invisible lines will remain between the beings so is the act which was acknowledged till as-ised by both parties.
The positive considerations, pleasure moments which we believe that they are better, since they are not destructive in sense, but they hold more power over the being since the pleasure moments pulls the person in-back to that blessed item over and over again like the joy of licking vanilla ice cream on the hot summer day.
The pleasure moment is the trap which holds the being in the MEST Universe. They have greater power since the pleasure moments are continually re-confirmed=acknowledged, agreed too and the confirmations are the solidifiers to makes that continue and to remain in the MEST.
The so-called “bad” we all want to destroy as-is, but the “good” we nurture. Yet both considerations belong to the MEST universe. They are the implants and they make the game the game, Gives the choice which side one once to play.
On the Path of Enlightenment, on the Path of Light neither side whatever maybe, “good or bad” has value, since they made up of energy, express energy. MEST IS MEST.
OH, to be or not to be!
PS: I know that LRH meant acknowledgement as an ending of the communication cycle. That is correct 100% right but there are different realities on any given subjects. In this case I am Indicating that my conclusion is not ending with the same reality as LRH’s, Simply the is more to his.
My view point is from the theta universe where things are not solid, therefore on acknowledgement is used to anchor the item, to remain solid so one could not lose it.
That acknowledged item would remain anchored into the same place no matter how long it have taken one to come back to that same place. By acknowledging yes that is end that cycle, but also makes it remain in that place and time. I do not quote LRH he does not quote me. He speaks for himself and I speak of my own reality.
There is no need to quote others after soloing one life time since I have had enough cognitions which given me knowledge on every subject I ever confronted. My knowledge is my own that knowledge has set me free from being dependant on others reality.
“”Acknowledgement”” is a creation a stepping stone in the chain of creation-communication, just one frame in the rolling movie picture and each frame is the NOW because there is no past or future.
No being is an island. All beings are nodes in a very complex matrix, as I see it.
________________________________
Yup.
yes we are. only considerations are lumps somes but even those differ in reality from one person to the other.
as I see it there are billions of little islands and they operate independently from each other, it might seems that they are connected through actions interact, b but long as one of this island cant duplicate totally, completely the other islands reality, they operate only on assumption that they know what the other island is thinking or doing.
V.. I always emphasise when write in blogs or I write in my own that what ever I say is my own reality.. and I don’t care if they believe in it or not.. why should any one believe me? is there a reason for that? no reason what so ever, because what I know is only my reality.
I take the viewpoint of the matrix as a whole, and not the viewpoint of some node.
________________________________
woof! I got that.woof 🙂 but one node from the other node who reside in Florida.. that is you….your reality on the scale of value is lower than the frogs bottom. and here I am too.. so if you want to talk to from one node to the other.. we are on even keel.
You can only represent what you know even if that knowledge were taken by you from some ”’important” personage still that stuff you put out has no more value that what I know. but mine is from cognitions.. but of course that is illusions. I keep forgetting that little fact! and yours is solid? you want another go around? have you recovered from your last battering? the bruises are all gone? 🙂 would love to have you for coffee and really get into you hair! 🙂
“I” seems be constructed of a matrix of beliefs through which a certain logic flows.
The “I’s” then form the nodes of a much larger matrix through which communication flows. A communication particle is what the logic of “I” spits out.
________________________________
V.. we been through talking chewing over the ..’I” there is no I –ME– You them their. they etc.. lets get a much better subject. .
V… it has been established that this Universe is nothing but energy particles.. the rest is illusions now knowing this and I believe it is true.. true for me.. what can be discussed about this, where one could take this subject and make it look different? please give your thought-your reality on this. thanks .
It would be interesting to look closely at the beliefs of “Elizabeth Hamre” and the logic that flows through those beliefs, or that of “Vinaire,” or “Geir” or “Chris Thompson.” Looking at the beliefs and logic of “Marildi” may be interesting too by using this model.
>
I would not know how to go about that: totally clueless, all I know how I have arrived to the conclusion what I believe in but the rest would be pure assumption on my part.
Assumption is on illusion… we put it there and we say that it there, that is how it is.. but all along that is our reality… so how can one dissect some one reality when we only assume what is there since we really cant duplicate what is in their universe-space-beliefs.????
We can only dissect-confront our own believes at any time.
It seems to me that a person can best be identified by their network of beliefs and their logic (the way of their thinking). There is ultimate reality, which in my opinion, is unknowable. One’s reality would be a filtered view of that ultimate reality. So, there is always a filter that is inherent to a node.
>
Got you there!!!! hehehe… how do you know that you are reading filtered reality? that is on HUGE assumption on your part. and there is on ultimate reality than that person KNOWS what is that bloody thing is! denial? that you do not know that is more likely., or have forgotten, now that too is the possibility.. Tell me why everything have to be a filtered reality? that do not make sense. I believe we are in the moment of NOW, we only can experience one moment at the time.. So when one has this moment only to experience that self created than there IS NO FILTER… that moment is real.. it did not happen eons back or will happen next year.. it is NOW.. NO filter can be added to that moment, but when I say I am looking through a filter. that too is in the moment of NOW.. so that view is again a consideration same as one would say I am not looking through filters. V… get your act together on this or we will not be going dancing.. [this is black mail] 🙂
Hehehe! That is your reality and not mine… so you can just play with your reality and feel happy. That is fine with me.
Anything other than ultimate reality is filtered reality. Even the postulate of ultimate reality is a filtered reality. By the time one actually reaches the ultimate reality the whole node is erased. Right now there is an EH node. It is not erased.
not erased? I wonder why you have that assumption?
The self itself is a filter, my dear Elizabeth.
there is no self.
If one knows there is Ultimate reality in existence than that person KNOWS WHAT THAT IS, otherwise that person could not possibly know about its existence! Chew on that Dear!
Ultimate reality is basically a starting postulate one uses to make sense out of all existence. Christians use a “super self” called God. Hinduism uses an “abstract nothingness” called Brahma, and Scientology uses a “Static”
KHTK postulates the ultimate reality to be “an undisturbed primordial field that contains no frequency, wavelength or period.” This primordial field produces awareness only when disturbed, and therefore it is inherently unknowable. This is a theoretical postulate, and not something actual.
The postulate of ultimate reality is true only to the degree that it brings consistency and coherency to the understanding of existence.
Hehehe! That is your reality and not mine… so you can just play with your reality and feel happy. That is fine with me.
Anything other than ultimate reality is filtered reality. Even the postulate of ultimate reality is a filtered reality. By the time one actually reaches the ultimate reality the whole node is erased. Right now there is an EH node. It is not erased.
Anybody who know ultimate reality is himself or herself dissolved and is not here. Those who are here may think that they know ultimate reality, but they don’t. They just hold a postulate of ultimate reality. That is not the same thing as knowing the ultimate reality.
The body do not dissolve… but the there is no personal , space, energy, no anchor. nothing.
Logic do not exist in the moment of NOW. Logic is a consideration which one has arrived by judging-sorting, juggling different views and arriving to conclusion “””YES, THIS FITS THE MOST INTO THE PUZZLE, THIS IS THE VERY BEST VIEW IN MY ETIMATION THE MOST VALUABLE THEREFORE IT HAS TO BE TRUE!””” than if that person collects agreement on that viewpoint than WE HAVE FACTS ESTABLISHED by agreement and that viewpoint is now solidified and used as reference point… HEHEHE… this kid here not buying this stuff.
Logic can exist in a moment of NOW that is a filtered moment of NOW. The person may not know the filter they are using. That is the most wonderful deception of all. 🙂
“Logic can exist in a moment of NOW that is a filtered moment of NOW.”
There are so very many vias to perceive through that our sense of now is quite sloppy. Our sense of now is so very thick that nearly an eternity of time passes every moment while we think we are in the now. That filtered moment of now is all the now we are ever going to experience. A precise now would describe some ultimate reality without the filters or vias.
Logic is the way of thinking. I see Elizabeth Hamre thinking. So there is logic at the EH Node.
Elizabeth its existence is on assumption. that do not exist as you assume it is.
You have constructed a person on what you read into some writing, and that person is your reality how you have seen those post, but that person is not my reality I don’t know anything about .. therefor I cant comment on what you know, since only you know your creation.
if you would have looked at few of those pictures of the irises than we could have establish a ”common ground” and go from there but purely based considerations which has no mass, no pictures, now to establish some sort of agreement is impassible. A ”person’= personality purely based on some concepts is only good and real as the imagination of the person=source who conjured up that personality. on the other hand any object could be a good point establish some agreements.
the problem remains is that you view everything by your reality. assumption that is all same for every one.
Then we are alike in viewing from our own realities.
________________________________
explain please what do you mean by that sentence?
It means that you are looking from “your reality” and I am looking from “my reality”.
________________________________
Right 🙂
The EH (Elizabeth Hamre) node always tags the communication particle its spits out with the tag “It is my reality”.
>
The “EH Node” likes to portray itself as an “island” and something unique.
>
Hehehe. ‘My reality” is on indicator exactly that it is only mine, not quoted, not facts, have not been taken from any other source. Island? the believes are that and I am not what I believe in since those change daily.:)
The circuits within the EH Node comprise of a configuration called “solo session.” Here input particles of communication are processed in a unique way so that most input seems to be converted into output. I don’t know if there are residues.
In other nodes, not all input may be converted to output. A lot of input may remain in a wait status to be processed. Many nodes may have lifetime of input stacked up.
>
I need to digest your assumptions.. but long as we are having fun.. Ok by me what they are.
We had here 4 days of rain and still cool, but the clouds are braking up. I am going out into the garden, and see what I can do by cleaning up. This garden is big and very lovely.
Now if you want to see something beautiful look this up on the internet . You will find that there is more to Elizabeth than posting. TRAILS END Iris Gardens: Go to irises than look up:
Stairway to Heaven, Queens Circle, Beverly Sills, Celebration Song, Hello Darkness, Conjuration, Before the Storm, Dusky Challenger, Jesse’s Song, Imbroglio, Pussycat Pink, Fortunate Son.. these we have here and they just finished blooming.
These are just Irises we have roses, 100 in number Rhodes and azaleas, have 40 hydrangeas, 16 clematis, and my speciality is growing oriental and trumpet lilies, plus 40-50 different kind of other flowers. Isis means in Greek : rainbow. Because of their magnificent color combination.
Your first assumption is to assume that I am assuming without completing the discussion. Am I going to get a ridge now?
>
I googled TRAILS END Iris Gardens and looked up the flowers you listed. They are beautiful. Am I right in assuming that you are an employee at TRAILS END and you take care of planting and grooming these flowers? Or, do you grow them at some other place and bring them here?
It seems that assumptions are those postulates that are incoherent and cause inconsistencies. Postulates that are coherent and consistent are not assumptions.
…when a ‘yes’ goes on a pure theta line and it penetrates another’s bank, then theta itself is acknowledged… ‘ i am what
you are’…
I am what you are that do not work on this planet since we cant duplicate others reality. on the theta line is what we put there our reality..that is what we experience not the other persons pictures-sensations-aches and pains.
I never accoutred ”potential will” since there is only NOW, and the ”potential” would indicate ”future” but we only experience in a moment and to that experience we attach considerations-beliefs : it was or it will happen and these thought-make believes give the illusions of continuum.
“Potential” does not mean or even indicate “future”; See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_energy
right, read it thanks.. now i am wealthier by one more viewpoint, now i have to figure it out how to use this new concept.
Good post Geir.
How would you use your therapy with a Bradley Manning? Julian Assange? Other prisoners of conscience who are trapped for doing what they believe is the right thing?
How would you coach one of the tortured 200 girls in Nigeria? And how would you suggest PREPARING someone for such a situation before it happens? If you had one of those Nigerian girls a year ago what would you teach her?
***
Along side your key therapy points, I think Amar could have therapy potential. It could be used for role-playing in sales, and in other communication drills.
As I mentioned years ago, I think Amar would be great for prisons or other dire circumstances. People could use two hands for dice. (one finger, two, three, four five and a fist for six.) Both players throw and add up the two hands. If it adds to over six, subtract 6.)
It seems that people are truly ill equipped for dealing with life issues with its like those poor girls in Nigeria. And there is no real training I know of for such situations. Do you know of any?
We don’t train people for such things. We don’t think to train our kids on how to be kidnapped and forced to follow another religion.
What would such training look like to you?
“when its like those poor girls.”
Oh. One last thing before I go away.
When are you going to run a Skype Amar session for your peeps here?
“It seems that people are truly ill equipped for dealing with life issues with its like those poor girls in Nigeria. And there is no real training I know of for such situations. Do you know of any?”
Hi Katageek! Long time no “see.” 🙂
In answer to your question, I know of some training for such situations! It’s described in this Tom Campbell video. Watch the last 15 minutes, starting at about 7:00 where he gives a practical way to learn how to do it.
He starts by saying that it boils down to the fact that we’re living in fear and need to let go of it – and then says how to do it. I think he’s basically saying the same thing Geir is saying. But the way Tom sees it is that we first have to learn that we’re not in control of anything important – except ourselves.
In brief, it’s not what happens to us but how we deal with it – and we need to make everything that happens to us a teacher. The ultimate example he gives is of Victor Frankle with respect to his experience in a concentration camp, where his wife and children were murdered and he himself was brutally tortured. He came out of it – in his own view – a much better, stronger, more spiritual person. In other words, he rose above it and turned it into a growth experience. The whole idea is that being a victim is a state of mind.
Yup – that would also answer Kg’s question to me.
The example you give above is in modern psychology known as “Post Traumatic Growth” (eclipsed by the more known “Post Traumatic Stress”).
Also, the reader with some knowledge of Scientology may have noticed that I (and Tom Campbell and others) have a very different take on responsibility than what is taught in Scientology. While Hubbard advocates an extreme (and contradictory) view of responsibility (you are responsible for everything that happens to you, you “pulled it in”, etc), I hold that shit can indeed happen to you without you being responsible for it… but the way you deal with it is your responsibility. You cannot control others – but you can control your own creations – at least your own thoughts, goals, emotions and feelings). See also this: http://www.a-circle.no/wiki/index.php?title=What_can_you_control%3F
Okay, but the “Post Traumatic Growth” part wasn’t the central point. It was about the attitude a person should take in everyday life, from the most ordinary situations to the most dire. I think that is essentially the same as what you’re saying, except that he delineates how one would go about achieving it on a practical, step-by-step basis. Maybe you do something like that too.
As for LRH’s view of responsibility, I think that has not been duplicated correctly. I could quote references but I’ve done so before and it seems that people just ignore them because they have been convinced by the group-think interpretation of other Scientologists.
As an easy example, the only place LRH gives the line “you pulled it in” is in the list of famous justifications! And yet, that has been repeated by the critics so many times on so many blogs that it follows the maxim – if something is said often enough, people will believe it.
“Beliefs are those that prove useful to the believer…”
http://vinaire.me/2014/06/15/notes-on-epistemology/#comment-23619
________________________________
Right, Vin. As I noted in another comment, we have to be able to recognize our underlying beliefs/considerations – and determine what they are based on. They can be blind acceptance of someone else’s truth – whether LRH’s or his critics – rather than personal observation. Or, as per people like Tom Campbell and others, it can simply be a matter of our own personal fears and ego that establish our beliefs and considerations.
Actually, I don’t think it was a matter of post traumatic growth on Frankle’s part. I just listened to that part of the video again, and if Tom’s understanding is correct, Frankl had those huge, life-changing realizations while he was still in the concentration camp. So it seems that it is possible to have a beneficial attitude under almost any circumstances.
The other thing I wanted to mention is that per Campbell a certain amount of introversion is needed for a person to even be able to recognize their own fears and beliefs – which they need to do before they can let them go.
I know for a fact that is in not “needed”. For some it may be a needed via – for others, nope.
Instead of “introversion” I should probably have said “introspection.” In any case, what I mean to say is that “delving into the past” is actually needed to a certain extent before one can really see what is there in the present.
Mindfulness simply looks at what is on the top of the mental stack in the present time that is waiting to be resolved. No searching of the mind is recommended.
________________________________
As I said – not needed for everyone.
Now IF one is responsible for one’s own thoughts and emotions – AND they are created every instance – THEN it follows that one could simply stop creating any unwanted thoughts or emotions.
But, but, but, I hear some say… “but there must be SOME kind of procedure, SOME tool, method or magic, or via or process or e-meter, or faerie dust or mindfulness or hoopla-hoo or… SOMETHING. At least some kind of LOOKING, or AS-ISNESS or, or, or!!
Nope. Just stop creating the shit. Any via is just that – a via to make the person stop creating the shit. But some people are actually so simple that they don’t need any via. They simply get it. Others object and say “it just CAN’T be THAT simple”. Yet it is.
Then why is it the case that you would do the Bridge all over again today if you had not already done it?
Because of the adventure. I would even contemplate joining the Sea Org.
Previously, your reason didn’t have to do with adventure of it – it had to do with the specific, direct benefits.
And now the reason is the adventure.
So you changed your mind as of just some days ago when you referred a poster to the blog post where you listed out all the gains you had from each level of the Bridge?
I did have the gains. But I didn’t have to do the Bridge to get them.
“I did have the gains. But I didn’t have to do the Bridge to get them.”
Bingo.
And if I wasn’t up to just “letting stuff go”, then maybe Scientology would be the right via for me. I used to be more complex.
DId Scientology have anything to do with you being less complex?
And what percentage of people would you say are simple enough not to need any “via”?
I don’t know – but I am pretty sir most would do just fine with a much less complex via.
And no, Scientology didn’t help me get less complex. That grew on me after I left. I’d say the most contributing factor in that evolution would be Brendam.
That’s really cool about Brendan. Kudos to you both. 😉
As for you being pretty sure that “most would do just fine with a much less complex via” – I’m pretty sure that is mostly conjecture. 🙂
Seriously, I doubt that you have dealt with a cross of the population. You probably mostly work with individuals who are well above normal ability to start with.
And you may be wrong about that assumption. Our was that a hope our wishful thinking? Most people do seem to prefer simpler religions than Scientology, though.
No, it wasn’t wishful thinking, it was an educated guess – to which you gave a no-answer. You have given no statistics or data about the people you have tested this simple approach on, now have you?
And still you shamelessly conclude on that lack of statistics? Hmmm… I prefer not to give any statistics on this to not label or box the people I help – not even in statistical generalities. But the statistics are Clearly Not siding with Scientology in this matter. More than 95% of those that get involved with the subject prefer to leave and seem other options. I think Scientology’s complexity accounts for a sizeable portion of that – bats on my own experience from talking to exes. .
An interest in statistics is shameless? Come on, let’s not confuse the issue with Scientology statistics as it really has no direct connection. The simple point is that your method may not work for most people, even though it has been working well for a select group. Both LRH and Tom Campbell aimed at a larger segment of the population, or all of it – and for that reason a simple solution was seen to not be workable.
Read again. I said nothing about any interest in statistics being shameless.
You wrote: “And still you shamelessly conclude on that lack of statistics?” And my reply – in essence – was that I think an interest in statistics is relevant to any PREMATURE conclusion, if indeed the success of this simple method is not workable for people in general.
Of course it is. But you made a conclusion based on – your words: *no statistics*. and you think that your “educated guess” regarding people I intimately know is somehow worth even a fraction of my statement?
No-no – by “no statistics” I didn’t mean you had not gotten any results. Not at all – I’m sure you have! I meant literally that you haven’t given an actual data – like how many people this method was tested on, what percentage it worked on, whether it was a cross section of the population, etc. And yes, knowing you I would expect that you almost entirely encounter a more able level of the population.
And let’s neither of us cloud this discussion by putting the attention Scientology – and imply that this simple method must be good (or bad) because Scn was so bad (or good), or some illogic like that. 😉 Let’s talk about it on its own merits.
And also, if the aim was the larger population, then I would have to conclude that Hubbard failed abysmally.
The path as such is what was aimed at the larger population – and I believe you yourself have basically stated that at least the lower Bridge does work for the vast majority. The fact that it didn’t ultimately get applied to the larger population did fail – but there were many factors involved that overshadowed the tech itself.
They’re would always be justification for low stats – something Hubbard himself warmed against. Leave that as it may. The fact remains – that Scientology has never been statistically proven to work. All evidence points to the contrary when it comes to uniform workability. Almost any other religion has a better track record. Possibly including satanism.
“Almost any other religion has a better track record. Possibly including satanism.”
LOL. See my last reply about discussing the subject on its own merits without confusing the issue with emotional rhetoric.
Looks like Discussion Policy is biting. 🙂
________________________________
“The simple point is that your method may not work for most people, even though it has been working well for a select group.”
I think the simple point is that no other method has ever worked for anyone, anywhere, anytime, in any other way. The ideology is the via. No matter if you were Victor Frankl or Buddha, we always find that it is our attachments which cause the stress. We can solo-audit, meditate, drug therapy, physical therapy, mental therapies, or fuckit, but at some point when a person gets to feeling better it will be because they let go of something that was bugging them and they do it by stopping bugging themself with it.
I totally agree – and there isn’t anything you’ve written here that I haven’t stated in one way or another on this very thread.
Cool! Our minds meet.
I think it happens about once a year or so. 🙂
🙂 ohhhh. the jig is up… secret mind meetings, those your wife know about this? 🙂
Halleluja
“Halleluja”
When I say stuff like this to Shelley, I routinely hear something like, “Oh that’s so great you’re figuring things out!” And I say, “What? . . . You already knew?” And then she goes something like, “Uh, yeah . . . But its still so good you’ve figured it out for yourself!”
Then she pats my head and asks, “Now, what would you like for supper?”
LOL!
________________________________
” LOL!” :-)!
Yes, Geir, hallelujah. I think we do basically agree that the active ingredient is the individual – and his or her ability to connect with themselves, so to speak. That is the only non-relative, fundamental truth, IMHO.
And I realized that I shouldn’t be focusing on whether or not the methodology you have devised works for everybody. The important thing is that it does work for some people – maybe for many people. So I don’t want to discourage that from going forward and doing all the good for people it can do. You are as much an inspirational teacher as many others – whose methods don’t work for everybody either, none of them. As you wrote in your article “On Will,” different strokes for different folks (very loosely paraphrased 😉 ).
Nice post Marildi.
Thanks. I do have my more lucid moments. 😉
Yup 🙂
I’m practicing another methodology. Unconditional love. 🙂
That would spoil all the fun now that you would not be putting up a ridge any more!
________________________________
I would like to place my order for some of that.
Okay, I’ll put you on the waiting list. 🙂
Just kidding. Actually, the fact that you would make such an origination is pretty impressive. I’ll have to put your application somewhere near the top of the pile. 😉
“I’ll have to put your application somewhere near the top of the pile. ;)”
Good, then follow Vinaire’s suggestion to un-stack from the top and I’ll be good with that.
Okie dokie.
“More than 95% . . . seek other options.”
Generous statistic in favor of Scientology. If 5% of its 8 million members stayed in, there would be 400,000 Scientologists. I will be generous and say Scientologists and staff of every label number less than 40,000 or 1/2 of 1% remain. My opinion is that there remain possibly 2,500 to 5,000 staff and public total – worldwide. Most of these arrived lately.
Yeah, probably less than one percent. Easily. An epic failure by any standard.
“I’d say the most contributing factor in that evolution would be Brendan.”
As golden a person as I’ve ever met. — truly an insightful wonderful guy. My boys still ask if I’ve any news of him. Likewise, my wife was that bright light in my life. She is so simple, childlike and wonderful. If not for her, I would have a worse man-crush on Brendan than I do.
Lol
“Because of the adventure. I would even contemplate joining the Sea Org.”
I was getting it before, now I’m more sure.
“Any via is just that – a via to make the person stop creating the shit.”
AKA placebo
Precisely.
Awesome blog-post Geir! A few paralell thoughts on the “fuck it”-attitude:
You don’t nessecarily have to be rude or crude to say “fuck it” – it is a consious decision to not care about traditional and a publically accepted state of mind in the moment you are at. You don’t even have to say it out loud. The fact that it works momentarily gives you exactly that moment, right there and then with the serenity to relax and be yourself with free will – ref.” FUCK IT!” :). Call it crazy, but I am think more like instant decisional thought. “Fuck it”, not him, her, them or that – “it”! Moving forward, and being able to have this attitude, I think will give you more and more confidence in your own self, and able to excercise this more and more easily when feeling otherwise stressed out or down. Your will then be able to use this fuck-it attitude (when needed) more and more to better your own state of mind on your terms, for the best of you – the best creater of free will and good things happening… for yourself 🙂
Great first comment, Håkon!
Welcome ☺
🙂
Håkon’s post didn’t show up for us to read it.
Okay, I see it now.
Geir, you wrote: ‘It boils down to “doing what helps” and “not doing that which doesn’t help” in any given situation. Creating feelings of “stress” or “panic” or “rage” may not be very helpful in a certain situation. If you looked at the situation calmly you may come to the conclusion that there are other, more helpful feelings that you could have created instead.’
That seems like a valid therapy – but maybe not workable for everyone. I’m curious how much of a true cross section of the population you dealt with. Do you find that most people can “look at the situation calmly”? Or are necessarily convinced that they should do so in a given situation?
It seems to me that at least for some people, lower Bridge auditing would get them to a point where they would be capable of benefiting greatly from your approach. Or maybe even doing just Life Repair.
I actually have come to a better understanding of this “letting go” approach, but how do you reconcile it with what you said recently about not hesitating to do the Scientology Bridge right now if you hadn’t done it already?
I wrote a lot so let me sum it all up in two questions:
1. What would you teach Bradley Manning if you were in his cell for a month?
2. What would you teach a kidnapped Nigerian girl a year before her ordeal?
My answer would be mildfulness, but the answer of others may vary.
please tell how mindfulness would help her when she is kidnapped and gang-raped by 15 guys?
And please tell me, Elisabeth, how scientology auditing would help her.
It would help her be “exterior” to her suffering.
Geir, before the fact it would not, but after the fact yes.. lots and lots of mindboggling sensations, screaming pain.. would have to be addressed thousands of hours.. She would never forget, but the MEMORY of that incident would fade.. Her life would be changed completely by the act of violation and new life: new realities would be needed to replace the old terribly painful pictures. she would have to be brought back to NOW.. to be experience her new views. Not easy but it could be done. Do you know that I live with Lime illness? I was infected when six by a Tic. Even such a illness which effects everything can be over ridden, have a huge headache[ most of my life I have one part of living] yet feel happy., contented and joy!
look up Lime thingy on wiki…..hehehe.. having that brought me new life, because I needed different realities. I clawed for different ..I know what auditing can do..
Mindfulness would help her be “exterior” to her suffering.
Sorry dear V… I don’t get that one. : she is laying in the dirt on the side of the road, bleeding from every crevice of her body, not only her body is crushed but her whole universe has vanished when the last guy pulled his thing out of her and spat and urinated on her body. Her pain is mindboggling but she cant escape and she knows if she wont move she will be eaten alive because the smell of blood will bring in the hungry predators, now how can one become exterior to those facts?
The following is a quote from the book “BUDDHA” by Karen Armstrong,
“If you look at things just as they are, you gradually gain the insight that makes the suffering more tolerable. It does not prevent the suffering that comes from growing old, getting sick, etc., but you can be peaceful in its presence. Following those insights you naturally develop a conduct that enhances peace and happiness.”
.
Yes.. V… that is how I live with Lime Disease.. thank you.. well said.
Yes – pretty much the essence of points #2, then #1 in the OP.
have you lived through similar suffering, or just believe that it would be like that for you.?
Yes. Tell me who has not suffered in this universe?
Thank you.. I am off for coffee, you are welcome to join. I do make good coffee. 🙂
got to be fuck-it… it works!
Brilliant post Geir. Every component just flat out works. You managed to encompass so many hard hitting points with this essay, that I can see it reverberating in many a ‘workshop’ around the workplace, the coffee shop and at home.
You will not believe me, but I have been practicing much of what you have written here, when I had a huge epiphany about two years ago! .. The ephiphany? …1) Just refused to let any shit ‘rent space’ in my head any longer. ..2) ‘Stay’ in present time.
life is all about ‘creation’ not ‘cave-in’ 3) one can ‘breathe life’, into anything under the sun! – ignore the ‘burdensome’ choices.
4) Laughter- still the best medicine. 5)Tone. one need NEVER be stuck in one.You can create ANY tone, art will!
Yes , that has been my simple life philosophy for the last couple of years. Life has never been more exciting or stimulating for me than is it is today!
But Geir, your article has clearly shown me how MUCH potential is their to be had. You bet I’m going to start implementing a whole stack of your advice!
Thanks soooo very much for sharing it with us, “Explorer Extraordinare”. Pssst.How IS the new improved version of a super buff Geir “shaping up” these days ? 🙂
hehe – let’s see in a couple of weeks, after vacation (sailing in Greece).
And, thanks for the acknowledgement 🙂
I will use this blog post as a reference in many coaching sessions.
🙂
Racing: +10
The F**k It books Geir introduced awhile back cost me only a few dollars. Understanding it in depth gave me the best practical, not available elsewhere. A whole simple concept which can’t be duplicated to any scientology words. 😀
“Racing: +10 The F**k It books Geir introduced awhile back cost me only a few dollars. Understanding it in depth gave me the best practical, not available elsewhere”
+1
Dee: “A whole simple concept which can’t be duplicated to any scientology words”
How about “Be willing to experience anything”? 🙂
Marildi: How about “Be willing to experience anything”? 🙂
That’s OK, but debatable, which I won’t. I’d rather say or think:
Be willing to imagine anything! 🙂
Dee, priceless response! Thank you. 🙂
so are you going sailing cause you enjoy it or because boats scare you?
Enjoyment 🙂
Instead of f*cking it, I perceive it and then there’s nothing to f*ck. I just don’t perceive it the way I -let’s say- normally perceive. That’s the whole trick for me. But anyway, like you said, whatever floats one’s boat. Are you gonna be floating near Athens?
hey, Spiros!
How is it going mr Chris? 🙂
Oh and congrats for your daughter!!!!
Thank you Spiros!
Spyros, that’s a good angle! I dunno that it’s gonna work in EVERY (tempting) situation, though ?? (if you get my drift)? 🙂
I dont know about that. All situations would mean to handle the problems ‘of the world’ I guess. If it happens, you will know 😛
Yup. Athens.
Cool. If you get into the city, we could meet and get lazy with trivial matters 😛
Regarding my answers to my own questions:
What I would teach Chelsea and the little girl is a LARPed up version of an RPG like Amar. That and Tonglen and the Lojong proverbs. (The Tonglen practice would also include PARTNER Tonglen where each takes upon themselves the suffering of the other and breathing out all the bliss one can create.)
So if social connection is allowed in the hell, the group can actually create a game of life to play within and create meaning and adventures and stories. And if no social connection is allowed, one can create a imaginary world that keeps one’s brain from becoming mush during solitary confinement. The random die would allow one to create actual conversations with imaginary people that would not be predetermined by the player.
on responsibility, hardship and happiness
‘how have i gotten myself right here’….’recognizing your own role
in the midst of suffering’…’the transformative power of
hardship…lies in your ability to understand your role and see
beyond the hopeless’
in my experience, when one really ‘confronts’ the ‘hardship’ in the
‘present moment’, the hardship vanishes and one is a bit more
alive or very alive be-cause of that (beautiful word…BE and
CAUSE one is then)….
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/23/adyashanti-happiness-hardship_n_5194219.html
Marianne, perfect video for this thread!
Geir, you need to watch this 2-1/2 minute video – it totally backs up one of your main points.
“I think… that the active ingredient is the individual – and his or her ability to connect with themselves, so to speak. That is the only non-relative, fundamental truth, IMHO. ~ Marildi”
I believe that all truth is relative, and that there is no absolute truth. A person may feel subjectively that his or her awareness or consciousness is absolute… but is it? I doubt it.
.
Awareness springs from an alteration of absolute reality.
So you say there does exist an absolute reality. How would one know that?
Correction:
Awareness springs from an alteration of postulated ultimate reality.
The ultimate reality cannot be known because there is no awareness at that level.
Okay. But then when awareness did arise, what was it aware of?
Itself!
Oh, you mean awareness of awareness?
Nope… the closest would be self-awareness.
Please explain the difference between the two. And also what you mean by “self.”
An example would be a thought is aware of itself as a thought.
Here the idea of self is very different than a thetan.
What exactly is the difference besides the terms?
What exactly is the difference between “self” and “thetan”?
I have described “self” in another post here as a complex matrix of static beliefs and dynamic relationship logics that is compressed into a recognizable node in a much larger matrix.
About “thetan,” its concept springs from Theta-Mest Theory which has lot of inconsistencies as pointed out in the Scientology section of my Blog.
http://vinaire.me/2013/07/24/scientology/
Vinay
________________________________
Vin, we were talking about the initial or original rising of awareness, and you said it was aware of “itself” and that “self is very different than a thetan.”
Then you went on to describe self as “a complex matrix of static beliefs and dynamic relationship logics that is compressed into a recognizable node in a much larger matrix.”
However, that would be way up the evolutionary line! I’d like to stay on the topic we began as regards initial awareness – which you called “awareness of itself”. So again, what exactly is “itself” in this instance?
Here are my postulates that are a work in progress:
(Possible revision) KHTK Postulate M-1A: For there to be awareness there must be disturbance.
The rawest of all awareness has to be the awareness of pure disturbance. Prior to that there would be no awareness. Only a theoretical ground state may be postulated in terms of undisturbed primordial field that contains no frequency, wavelength or period.
But this ground state shall forever be unknowable and shall remain only theoretical because there is no awareness to go with it. Awareness arises only when this ground state is disturbed. The awareness then accompanies a disturbance that seem to be traveling through a primordial field.
.
KHTK Postulate M-1B: This disturbance has the outward form of primordial light wave.
This is a very raw level of creation. Soul, self, energy, matter, etc., come later.
While awareness is the essential property of this disturbance, the outward form of the disturbance is not different from some primordial harmonic of the electromagnetic wave. The wave-length of this disturbance is nearly infinite, and the frequency nearly zero. The period and velocity are infinite for all practical purposes.
We instinctively associate light with awareness. Both of them seem to have the same basis. Both seem to be merely two different aspects of the same primordial phenomenon.
Light may fall in the category called ‘physical’. Awareness may fall in the category called metaphysical or ‘spiritual’. It is quite possible that the old assumption that ‘physical’ and ‘spiritual’ are two separate phenomena is in error. More likely the ‘universe’ is a single phenomenon and ‘physical’ and ‘spiritual’ are two different ways of looking at it.
.
________________________________
KHTK Postulate M-2A: Awareness results in knowledge.
The raw awareness is aware of itself as “a phenomenon with aspects of awareness and light.” This is a datum of knowledge.
.
KHTK Postulate M-2B: There is oscillation between perceiving and experiening.
There are phases of perceiving and experiencing. These may correspond to primordial harmonics of electrical and magnetic phases respectively.
Awareness results in perception of what is there. This perception is then assimilated as experience. Thus, knowledge continues.
There is a finite frequency, wavelength and period to this oscillation.
.
Vin: “The raw awareness is aware of itself…”
What I get, then, is that as a result of a disturbance of an unknowable primordial field, there arose a “raw awareness” which was “aware of ITSELF”. So this “itself” is evidently a somethingness which is capable of perceiving its own somethingness – i.e. itself\.
This is much better than the idea that everything is a consideration resulting from a previous consideration, with infinite regression that is clearly circular. At last we have a source point of some kind. Like! 🙂
Thank you, Marildi. This is about the hundred and twenty-fifth revision. There may still be ways to go before it really comes into focus.
________________________________
Progress means you must be doing something right. Carry on! 😉
I am away for my evening walk now. 🙂
Good for you. I’ll look for your answers later then.
‘If this, then that’ etc. That is not free thinking. It’s thinking based on the past. Physics obey that, alright. ‘If that stone got thrown with blah power from blah distance with blah angle, 2,3 millisecond ago, it’s on it’s heading towards my head’. Thoughts don’t have to obey all that (but can).
Yeah, exactly. 8-8008. 😛
How nice, then. We’re all full of bs. But no. That could be a perspective. But the thing is each one of us can and does create his illusions. And whether they are about physics, Shiva or martians, he has the right to –at least for himself. He can’t impose those on others, nor inhibit them from having their illusions either. I think those are the basics of overts. And I don’t say all that about as-ising so as to as-is every possible thing. It’s just that I think for myself I no longer want to play some games and I want to play some other games. I spend most time keeping my body from dying. I have to work, feed, sleep?..thats way more than half a lifetime. What am I, prisoner? Yeah it can be fun too. It is. But all games are. I dont want to play all games.
Good morning, Spyros.
I read your post here, but I don’t get “the bottom line” exactly. Tell me what you basically wanted to say. Or else… 😛
That since all people think with ridges (assuming one is into scn and agrees with that) arguing about what is true and real is silly. People dont even perceive the is-ness clearly, leave alone the as-isness. The most contradictory thing you could hear from a human would be “you are dramatasing”. I also reffered to a couple of other topics 😛
Spyros: “That since all people think with ridges (assuming one is into scn and agrees with that) arguing about what is true and real is silly.”
Again, it isn’t true that per Scn all people think with ridges, at least not all the time. And discussion about what is true and real isn’t silly, IMO – I, for one, feel I have learned from it. What you wrote in your last couple comments, for example, is the type of food for thought that people can benefit by. Sometimes you sound a bit pessimistic. Why is that? 😛
Hi Marildi. I also said that this could be viewed as invalidation, but it would just be a perspective. Look, its different to say that ‘I know reality/truth and thus I know you are tripping’ than to assume there is no uniform truth/reality and allow each one to have his illusions. Also I dont add invalidative quality to the word ‘illusion’ either –obviously, I wouldnt nick-name myself illusionist, then. Im not pessimistic about illusions and games in general. I do think that for a game to exist, the truth must be hidden more or less. But thats OK, as long as Im not trapped. So now I deal with feeling trapped in a few games and yeah untill im done I may blow some steam here. I hope you dont mind. Im not the only one who blows steam here.
I dont have the PDC in front of me now, but I clearly remember more than once LRH stressing how homo sapiens think with ridges and thus why its impora.nt to seperate the thetan from the body to think freely. Thus, the goal of theta clear. Take it or leave it, it’s just LRHs words. Some times I take or leave stuff. From own experience (as a body) I see and tell myself that simply things arent what they seem to be. And I dont take it as invalidation. It is fortunate, as there are no unsolvable problems, from that perspective.
Spyros: “So now I deal with feeling trapped in a few games and yeah until I’m done I may blow some steam here. I hope you don’t mind. I’m not the only one who blows steam here.”
Mind if you blow steam? Of course not! Most everyone here has done so too – some of us much more than you! And if you want to talk about the games you feel trapped in, feel free. 😛
On the point about “thinking in ridges” I replied to that in the other comment I just posted.”
Thanx. I try to not speak of probs too much. Because then I dont have them anymore and I need to take back what I had written –dev t.
“Think with ridges”: ” A thetan makes a thought, it hits one ridge then another then the other ridge hits another ridge” etc. Thats not really a quote. Its as close as I can remember. Also lrh stated entities to be somewhat “wrapped in a ridge”. So those ridges included entities –to make it more complicated. Dont ask me whether ridges or entities exist. I think its not a standard for all. Also, The thetan initiated that whole thought sequence. So yeah, he is cause over it. I didnt mean to imply otherwise. Its just that problems are generally bs, I have found. Good for me 😛 Also it shows the importance of not thinking with your brains (now thats a good one, for a scn critic to laugh at me)
Okay, got it. I don’t know exactly how LRH worded it in the PDC’s, but I do know that the present tense in English can be used to express rather different things. If someone says “Marildi speaks English” they mean that it’s the language I ALWAYS speak. But “Spyros speaks English” means that you can and sometimes do speak English (maybe even most of the time) – but not ALWAYS. Anyway, I’m sure you know all that since your English is quite fluent, but the point I’m making is that I think when LRH was talking about humans thinking with ridges he didn’t mean ALWAYS.
However, when I looked for a reference on this in 8-8008, I found that what you said was pretty close and not that much of an exaggeration. Here’s an excerpt:
“Ideas are invariably and inevitably senior to force and action, if those ideas stem from self-determined thought.
“Ideas born out of stimulus-response thought bear at times an almost indistinguishable similarity to self-determined ideas, but are occasioned by associative logic.
“In Homo sapiens, it is quite common for the person to believe himself incapable of originality. This is because the MEST universe will brook no competitor. Operating on a highly self-determined plane, originality is a simple thing to attain.
“What is called willpower, then, could have two manifestations. The first would be actual self-determined thought. The second would be a result of an enforced or inhibited thought. When Homo sapiens attempts to exercise his will-power, he NORMALLY [my caps] brings into flow the ridges around the body and is nullified by them and is pressed into aberrated behavior.” (8-8008)
I see. I dont remember whether it is mentioned in 8-8008, but LRH in the PDC (which all interested in scn must read) made a distinction between kinds of thoughts. The highest is a postulate. It doesnt contain mass and doesnt need to be located in space and time. And he said as one descends the tone scale (below 40, not 4) he considers himself as well as his thoughts more and more solid. So a homo sapiens thoughts are not that airy. It is a matter of what he thinks he is, you see. A human, naturally grants himself a solid beigness and his thoughts as well. People think their thoughts are the result of chemical reactions. Plus, for any logic, analysis, evaluation to be made, thoughts must be granted time –they must persist. Or else you cannot say ‘if this, then that’. Thats time sequence. A 40 can say ‘horse’. But a 4 must take his body to the stable to see that horse. He needs logic. He must drive, buy gasoline, eat sometyhing on the road, go to the toilet…you get my point. Logic. 🙂
All that I said is -of course- as true, as the laws of case acquisition, restimulation, etc. I mean they’re observations, but junior to what one thinks. You can Clear by running basic basic (theorically for me, as I didn’t run anything), or by who knows how many ways. In Scn alone there have been many ways. So the engramic theory and handling is limited and serves a certain approach. To speak in Hubbardese, I see no reason why you cannot do this and that and clean, mass-free postulates etc. Those things (masses etc) can only exist for as long and as much as you create them. I only wanted to say something about logic, which is highly elevated, and problems which are highly elevated too. They can be, they dont have to be. I mean all problems. Those problems ‘out there’ too. :p
I meant to think about something, to hear or read about it, is different than to perceive it through the body. And to perceive it through the body is different than to perceive it through nothing. Its a gradient of alterations.
Very good post, Sypros. 😛
At the end you wrote: “What am I, prisoner? Yeah it can be fun too. It is. But all games are. I don’t want to play all games.”
Which games do you want to play?
M and compliments 🙂 I have a wide taste on games. But a life in which in you to trade honesty for survival is not for me. I dont want to be a piece. Ever since school times (and even earlier) I just didnt want to be there. To have somebody tell me off because i didnt parrot history, or because i didnt wear the right clothes or because i didnt make him enough money? I think an honest war would be better than that. Maybe thats why tv viewers are so addicted to ww2, it uplifts them. I too play war games on the computer some times. Not that war is my desire, but its better than suppression. For me work that is not done for the work, but to be kept alive is suppression. I want to work towards achieving something, not so I wont die. Thats blackmail. Alas, it’s ‘normal’. Normal is sick for me.
And what games do you play in life?
Essentially, Knowledge would be anything that one is aware of. Each datum that one is aware of is a datum of knowledge. The relationships among such data of knowledge may be considered second tier of knowledge. There can be many such tiers of knowledge forming a multi-dimensional matrix of knowledge.
The matrix of knowledge develops into a matrix of beliefs with a dynamic matrix of “relationship logic” flowing through them. This, when compressed into a node in a larger matrix, becomes a recognizable “self”.
Each datum of knowledge has its vector of awareness. Whole matrix of knowldge has a vector of awareness that is the resultant of all its component vectors of awareness.
Each belief has a static vector of awareness. Each relationship logic has a dynamic vector of awareness. “Self” consists of a complex matrix of beliefs and relationship logics. The awareness of “Self” is the resultant of all static and dynamic awareness vectors of its belief and logic components.
I am not quite sure what “awareness of awareness” means. According to Hubbard, it is a subjective feeling that one is aware. An insect or a blade of grass may not have that feeling, but a human being does. This may be the awareness of relationship logic that is felt as flowing when the Self-matrix is very complex. Its flow may be expressed as the flow of attention.
At the moment, the above is a working model that is developing as we discuss. I have no idea what direction it might take.
.
________________________________
Awareness of awareness leads to infinite regress.
“Okay. But then when awareness did arise, what was it aware of?” Marildi, you are scratching where I itch. For me, it seems this question stretches the envelope at the edge of Gödel’s Incompleteness. For me, the obvious answer is that “the awareness becomes aware of itself,” and there I am again sitting in my tautogical universe. But I have not despaired. I seem to be coming to terms with and acceptance of my place in the scheme of things, “. . . no less than a tree or a star. . .” Letting go of my attachment to anthropomorphic standards of consciousness, considering consciousness like Carl Sagan’s “Flatland,” without stopping my exploration, helps me feel happy and peaceful about the progress I am striving to make without feeling anxious about the marks that I will never make. Like all of us here, I do acknowledge nearly infinite knowledge left to discover, and if that were true, then why wouldn’t consciousness continue to increase as well?
Good post! 🙂
“Good post! :)”
🙂 Thank you.
Chris: “For me, it seems this question stretches the envelope at the edge of Gödel’s Incompleteness.”
I forget exactly what I’ve read, but I know that not everyone agrees with Gödel’s theorems – at least not with respect to all situations.
“…why wouldn’t consciousness continue to increase as well?”
Exactly – why wouldn’t it? You wouldn’t be the first to theorize that new consciousness comes into the universe continuously. It seems like a no-brainer to me, but I guess that’s just intuition on my part. Nevertheless, even Einstein operated largely on intuition. 🙂
Btw, 2ndxmr has been posting comments about his creation theory on David St. Lawrence’s forum, and some of the ideas I’ve gotten about creation etc. have been influenced by his model – just
to give credit where credit is due.
Excellent answer.
Excellent question.
“Awareness springs from an alteration of absolute reality.” This is a nice way of saying that awareness springs forth from somewhere. Once again, tautologically, we cannot say from where. My own conjecture is that we are creatures from, and conscious of a narrow vector of what is going on. My question at this time is, “Can the subset extrapolate itself as a subset?” (Reference: “Flatworld.”) Do Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems allow for this?
If it is indeed a fractal universe, Mr. Flogger of Fractals, wouldn’t that tend to infer that extrapolation from the subset is quite possible?
“If it is indeed a fractal universe, Mr. Flogger of Fractals, wouldn’t that tend to infer that extrapolation from the subset is quite possible?” That’s where my question to Geir about Gödel’s Incompleteness was going. I don’t understand whether Gödel’s leaves us stuck in The Truman Show, or if there is a caveat to allow an out for expansion. We sure are writing and conjecturing, but extrapolating? No. My understanding of extrapolating is as a calculated value between two other known values. In this conversation, we are saying we know something about the set we are in but we cannot extrapolate the other end which is in another conjectured but unknown set of values. As for fractals, that’s a Truman Show within a Truman Show within a Truman Show! 🙂
What occurs within a universe may not be extrapolated to the universe as a single system.
For example, Cause and effect may be observed as separate events within a system, but to extrapolate it to universe causes inconsistencies. There is no spiritual universe separate from the physical universe. There is no sepatrate God as a creator of the universe.
Similarly, Gödel’s theorems apply to very specific systems as was taken up earlier on my blog. They may not apply to universe as a whole.
http://vinaire.me/2012/07/20/godel-and-determinism/
Vinay
________________________________
It would help me learn if you could give some concrete examples.
I am assuming that you read the essay linked in my post. Right?
Chris, here’s the definition of “extrapolate” that I had in mind:
“to extend the application of (a method or conclusion, especially one based on statistics) to an unknown situation by assuming that existing trends will continue or similar methods will be applicable.”
Now, as regards the Truman Show within a Truman Show, the buck has to stop somewhere – or we get into an “infinite regress” as Vinnie mentioned earlier today.
But just think about it – in the space of ETERNITY surely 50,000 monkeys…(and you know the rest). In other words, just by the law of probability – which we know from quantum physics to be the woof and warp of the universe – no matter how infinitesimal the odds, sooner or later “something” would arise with an inherent capability for awareness. And the universe would have continued to evolve from there.
This may sound simplistic, but more than one theoretical physicist have come up with this view. And like I indicated earlier, even Einstein didn’t start with the math – he started with intuition and then figured out the math.
As per the PDC, all human thinking (logic, evaluation) is thinking with ridges. Nothing ever as-ises, only new ridges are created by colliding and combining ridges to be driven to conclusions. So then go figure who is dramatizing, who is crazy etc.
Hey Spyros, when you wrote this comment my reply to you in our exchange on Marty’s was still in moderation. I wrote that you should check out Geir’s current thread because it related to the subject we were on. Did you read my mind? 😉
And as for that PDC tape, you make it sound like LRH said that ALL human thinking was like that. I know he didn’t because the companion book to those lectures, Scn 8-8008, said otherwise. 😛
Central to the OP is the question, “What if you at your core is ‘potential will’ ?”
That none of us have addressed this question masks the assumption that we all fully understand the implications of “What is potential will?”
Geir gives a good synopsis of gaming and how as one immerses into a game they acquiesce to barriers and purposes and give up freedoms. I would enjoy taking this a little further.
What about “will?” What is the starting point? At what point does potential will become kinetic will? We all recognize the willful child. Babies express their will in the beginning simply by complaining (crying). As they grow, they learn. As they learn they become more sophisticated in the ways that they demonstrate their will and their will becomes more willful. What do we know and what can we learn from this?
Kinetic will in adults is often expressed eloquently using an “x” factor called charisma. We recognize this when we see it and we often vote for it with a ballot. We like leaders with charisma and a a will (we hope) to amplify our own.
So how much will is available to a person? What exactly does this question mean? What is it asking? Is will a measure of what a person can do? Does the person have to be effective in order for their will to count as will or does fashioning wings of chicken feathers and jumping from the roof of a barn qualify as will?
Good string of questions!
________________________________
“Good string of questions!”
The problem with considering “will” is that will is a word that purports to explain kinetic activation of some things. I can demonstrate this to myself while I type on my keyboard by slowing and stopping and then starting typing again and I call this “my will.” When talking to people about some skill like this, a person will hear things like I just can’t make my fingers do that, and that does seem to be so. Some people seem to be able to activate their will better and worse than others. My wife’s will has resulted in my kids becoming good musicians.
The “knee-jerk” reaction is not credited as will and I see why, it seems easy to demonstrate that the nervous reaction only travels from the knee to the spine and back to the knee. Is this a clear line drawn between will and reaction? The problem is that there are mental reactions which can look like will and they might be but they can look just like the knee-jerk. And I know about being a jerk. I think it was Marilyn Monroe (or Mae West?) who said “I have plenty of will power, I just don’t have enough won’t power.” Funny! But is there something we learn about will from a quip like this?
Here’s a possible springboard for this topic of “will,” which in this 7-minute video is said to be a synonym of “intent.”
Great vid marildi, thanks for putting it here…the way i see it,
when we speak of intent, it can mean a ‘person’s’, some”one” ‘s
intent which is based on the initial thought of ‘i ‘…from there we
get ‘my’ intent which will have an effect on ‘you’ (com, data exchange as he says)…there is though that ‘carrier-wave’, ‘life-force’, ‘flow’, which, in my experience is ‘doing the job’….ultimately this Source-Flow is which ‘wakes up’ (starts to flow free) and is able to change thoughts, emotions, intents. This is which underlies
the manifestations of Life and this is which brings about Change,
as it is impersonal and is the source of each person, being, thus
only this has the ability to create and uncreate whatever manifestation, including ‘intent’.
Very well stated, Marianne 🙂
Glad you like it, Marianne!
One thing that may not have been clear in the vid is what Campbell means by “the data.” It isn’t physical universe data that he’s talking about but, rather, the totality of “information” that is contained in Consciousness as a whole – which we all have access to because we are all “pieces” of consciousness.” I got this understanding from watching a lot of his videos, but it might not have been clear in this particular vid.
…thanks marildi, i got it from the vid.
To take life apart at the seams to build a better understanding of how it works as whole cloth is a challenging and worthy endeavor. When we understand something about our chemistry, we are able to make adjustments with medicines, eating habits, exercise, etc., which improve our quality of life.
We may be made of stardust but we don’t live on a star sized scale. We may use quantum mechanics to help understand and build technology to enhance and add a magic touch to our daily lives but we do not currently nor in the foreseeable future live as quantum sized bits.
We live our lives at a scale where what we think and how we act matters. We live our lives at a scale where potential will can be nurtured or activated if you will to become kinetic will.
Living as bodies built on the demonstrably fractal information contained in our DNA, we are 99.9% identical and yet no two of us are identical! For me, this irrationality is both a beauty and bane of my existence. So did I have a point? Just that we should remember to live our lives mindfully, savoring the moments and enjoying all the bits that go into living a human existence without constantly yearning for what never will be lived nor ever known.
We are mortal yet our genetics stretches our reach through eons and is our strength. For this, we have always been envied by the Gods. It’s not new advice to “eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die,” but it’s still sage. So we should choose life and endeavor to live!
Or as Shelley tells me, “Have a good time, all the time.” — Now let’s all go to Greece and pile on Geir and Brendan’s boat! hahaha Have a great time Geir! Oh, and if you see Spyros, or even if you don’t, please tip a glass of ouzo and say my name near Athens. I would really like that!
We don’t have to worry about 99.9% that is identical or consistent.
According to my philosophy, if we have to increase our understanding we need to focus on that remaining 0.1% to understand it better.
There are inconsistencies in Greece, so there is opportunity for Geir to increase his understanding during this trip.
🙂
LOL!
https://isene.me/2014/06/16/your-life/#comment-72410
The above post from spyro brought the following in focus for me.
(1) A self is a node in a very large matrix of selves in which communication flows.
(2) Each self is a compressed matrix of beliefs in which logic flows.
(3) A communication particle arrives at the self and activates the flow of logic inside it.
(4) The logic flows through the complex matrix of beliefs inside the self.
(5) These beliefs are cross-indexed in a fantastically efficient way.
(6) This cross-indexing generates the framework of logic.
(7) The flow of logic consists of the sequences in which these relationships are activated.
(8) A score is kept in terms of the summation of the vectors of activated relationships.
(9) The final resultant vector is shaped into a communication particle.
(10) This communication particle is spitted out by the self.
We can probably make an animation out of the above model. This is a reality-centric model. There are an incredibly large numbers of variables here. How and in what sequence they could be activated provides an incredibly large number of choices for logic to flow. Here may lie the secret of “I”, “will” or “intention.”
https://isene.me/2014/06/16/your-life/#comment-72419
The above post from marildi brought the following into focus for me.
(1) Self-determined thought would be a thought without inconsistencies.
(2) It will be output from a self-node with no inconsistencies in its beliefs and logic.
(3) Overcoming of inconsistencies in beliefs and logics may require force.
(4) Reactive (stimulus-response) thought arises from inconsistent logic.
(5) The lesser are inconsistencies in logic the more original ideas it can produce.
(6) Will power and originality shall depend on how flexible the belief structure and logic is.
.
Vinaire, your post brought into focus for me that self-determinism is self-centric, while pan-determinism is reality-centric (to draw analogies to your recent work.)
Great!
>
https://isene.me/2014/06/16/your-life/#comment-72423
Here are what came in focus when reading the above post:
Tone scale of a communication particle may depend on how many beliefs are constraing it, and the complexity of those beliefs.
.
https://isene.me/2014/06/16/your-life/#comment-72427
Comment:
Case would depend on the Complexity of beliefs and the rigidity of their structure. As beliefs simplify and become more flexible, the case moves toward its resolution. In many ways logic also becomes simpler and flexible along the way.
.
Spyros and Vinaire, this excerpt from 8-8008 is in reply to the both of you, with regard to your posts about logic and its relationship to the Tone Scale. (Vin, you can substitute your own construct for “immortal being,” or skip that part and I think it this excerpt may still be of interest to you in other parts.):
“Logic is a gradient scale of association of facts, of greater or lesser similarity, made to resolve some problem of the past, present or future, but mainly to resolve and predict the future.
“Logic is a gradient scale of association of facts, of greater or lesser similarity, made to resolve some problem of the past, present or future, but mainly to resolve and predict the future.
“Logic is the combination of factors into an answer. The mission of the analytical mind, when it thinks, is to observe and predict by the observation of results. Easily the best way to do this is to BE these objects one is observing, thus one can KNOW their condition completely. However, if one is not sufficiently up the scale to be these objects, it is necessary to ASSUME what they are. This assumption of what they are, the postulating of a symbol to represent the objects, and the combination of these symbols when evaluated against past experience or ‘known law,’ bring about logic.”
[…]
At its best, logic is rationalism. For all logic is based upon the somewhat idiotic circumstance that a being that is immortal is trying to survive. Survival is a condition susceptible to non-survival. If one is ‘surviving,’ one is at the same moment admitting that one can cease to survive. Otherwise, one would never strive to survive.
An immortal being striving to survive presents immediately a paradox. An immortal being must be persuaded that he cannot survive, or that he is not or might become not, before he would pay any attention to logic. By logic, he can then estimate the future. Probably the only reason he would want to estimate the MEST universe, aside from amusement, is to keep alive in it or to maintain something in a state of life in it.
“Logic and survival are intimate. But it must be remembered that if one is worried about his own survival and is striving for his own survival, he is striving for the survival of an immortal being. Bodies are transient, but bodies are an illusion. One could bring himself up the Tone Scale to a point where he could create an imperishable body with ease.” (Scientology 8-8008)
Sorry, the first paragraph was quoted twice by mistake.
This is food for critics (it’s abnormality). And it’s awesome. I too think that stress is put on the analytical mind, and data evaluation, and ‘facts’ and ‘get your facts straight’, and ‘you don’t know the truth, let me explain it to you. You can’t. I wish we could.
Spyros, I appreciate you. 🙂 You are one person who is still willing to look at LRH data – and one who seems to duplicate and be favorable towards much of what he had to say.
One of the main things LRH is criticized about is how he went about his research. Here is one explanation he gave in 8-8008:
“The work which lies before you is a discussion of beingness and is the track of agreement which became evidently the MEST universe. Therefore this work appears to be logical. But it appears also to be the central thread of logic.
“Apparently, these conclusions were reached by logic; they were not, they were reached by observation and by induction. That, when tested, they proved themselves in terms of behavior, demonstrates not that they are logical – but that they are, at least to a large extent, a discussion of beingness.
“Scientific logic and mathematical logic have the frailty of trying to find out what is there before one goes there. One cannot ever be, if he has to know a datum about the beingness first. If one is afraid to be, one will become, of course, logical.
“This is no effort to be abusive upon the subject of logic or mathematics. It is only necessary at this point to indicate a certain difference between what lies before you and a logical arrangement of assumption.” (Scientology 8-8008)
yes…one is curious what being ‘human’ is…so one starts to experience it…when the experience is ‘full’, one is neither human, nor non-human…one IS…..and as it is true for ‘each’ ‘one’,we can discover the ONE PRESENT BE as Life’s Core…in each ‘human’ being…so, we experience one-ness….
…only from source can one experience the creating of a datum…
the analytical mind is a useful tool of the source but not the source
itself…
Yes, Marianne, we have had a great laugh about this point previously. Via Adyashanti, we learnt, (and realized!) that at the CORE, there is absolutely NOTHING, –except pure, Matterless, Energyless, Spaceless, Timeless (MESTless) – “potential” to Be, Do, Have, ‘games’ in a theta, mental , or physical universe.(obviously assisted by having a ’55 perception’ human body to give/have sensation/s with, to add some ‘interest’ haha!)
The LRH ‘gift to mankind’, — his ‘summary of investigations into the human spirit’ — which he called: ‘The Factors’, describes this ‘potential’, pretty convincingly, imho. 🙂
hi! haha… ‘in”ter’est…creating space, a territory to play in it….
and as you say, we can ‘breathe life’ into anything under the Sun…so, do you have a wish which music, song we breathe
life into next? just ask and i will put it here…
🙂 thanks for the offer, most kind of you, but by now my reality is that each cognition in it self is the Song of the Universe which has been received by all. 🙂
sure, yes…and i observed that when i breathe life into, listen
to a ‘product’, it triggers a ‘chain’ response…that is why i like
music…there is motion…sound has an effect to produce motion…
Hi Sis. Good to ‘see you’ here! Yes indeed, here is something that can ‘breathe life’ AND emotion into the recipient: “Sam Smith — Stay With Me. ft.Mary J, Blige ” –You Tube.
L, and thank you, Ray
…right out of love, ray and to each reader here as well…
…there was this song too on the site, i thought to put it here for
you…hope you like it too
…surprising may it be, i haven’t listened too much from Mary J. Blige so far…the following i find to be a great song too…
…a bit connected to the ideas and messages of these songs,
here is what Adya says about the ‘ego’ in the simplest way possible…
..and truthful and accurate self-expression which has the power
to heal any division…
Hi again Sis, and thank you for all the vids. Great to watch!
…. And Adya’s 9 minute clip was another neat piece to ‘the’ puzzle, as only he, seems to have the ‘words’ to put it!
We said goodbye to a a very good friend (my personal best friend) today. D’tails follow further down the page.)
hi ray
…i read your beautiful words in honour of your friend, of his life.
i clearly remember you writing about meeting him in the mall.
i did not know him but what you write about him to me shows
that he devoted most of his life to supporting life on this planet both in his private and public life. You did what you could, your
best to help his final months.
i stop…as i don’t find any words now…..
+1
Marianne, thank you so much for your kind thoughts. Yes, and you are so right, finding the right words, to express such a huge loss at a time like this, can never seem adequate.
I think the worst thing about data evaluation is that it never reveals a source. Source revealed, there are no more data. So logic can be an infinite loop.
I’ve seen that too at times. But as LRH indicated (in that first long excerpt, a few comments up), if one isn’t high enough on the scale to just know by “being the object” (or by “pervading the area,” as he worded it in another lecture) then logic has its use as a way of knowing. I think it’s just a matter of not switching from one “frame of reference” to another. In other words, for the most part things are relative, not absolute in terms of right/wrong or useful/useless. Here’s one more quote for you:
“DIFFERENTIATION is at the top of the tone-scale and is a condition of the highest level of sanity and individuality.
“ASSOCIATION or similarity is a condition which exists from the upper to the very low range of the scale.
“IDENTIFICATION is at the bottom of the scale.
“The condition of the preclear can be established readily by his ability to associate. He can, however, associate much too well. Association is the essence of logic. Logic is the gradient scale of relating facts one to another. As logic reaches the lower part of the scale, this relationship becomes finer and finer until at last identification is reached and thought could be expressed in terms of A = A = A = A.” (Scientology 8-8008)
Yes, I remember that too. I think there can be a confusion while studying scn, and not because of MUs. Starting from dmsmh up to the latest years, there is the concept of imrovement –that one is something and becomes something else through processing (example: from preclear becomes clear). Yet, there have also been instances where it is stated the one is and will always be himself and nothing else. Im not going analyseto what himself means now, so as not to abberate too much. I just disagree with the concept of improvement. You cant improve nothing. You improve the identity, alright, if you want, but not the being. Im saying this because to be things like a chair, a bunny etc is not some ability that is gained, for me. Its inherent and always present. Its the same as to be a being. If you view from the body’s viewpoint, of course its imposible and crazy stuff.
“I just disagree with the concept of improvement. You cant improve nothing. You improve the identity, alright, if you want, but not the being.”
Interesting. Okay, I have a question for you. You’ve expressed this type of thing before, so tell me something – what were you into just before this sort of disagreement started?
Marildi, before I answer, “you cant improve nothing” doesnt mean “you cant improve anything”. By nothing i meant static. Do you still want to ask me the same?
I got what you meant about “nothing” (as in a static). 😛 So yes, I still want to ask you the same. Be as precise as you can for me.
I guess first was LRH who said things like that one is always himself and doesnt become anything else and he creates his conditions in like and he IS and he doesnt become cause. And he can take responsbility for anything through hot processes like that in the ability congress. Then spiritologie explained things from a more staticy point of view and didnt bother as much with identities. But all those were data. My knowing what I am (not) and what I can be is due to practice and experience. And actually quite reecently I had quite e revelation about all that (its not the first timw, but its very significant). That I had a thetans potential I also knew before scn. I didnt get into scn because i belieged the COSes div 6 PR, you know 😛
Wow, very cool about that revelation. I duplicate the rest of what you said too.
But I’m still curious about you “disagreeing with the concept of improvement.” And that was why I was asking what you were into or studying just before you came up with that disagreement.
You’re handling me q&a but I have already answered. It is even logical that you can improve something but you cant improve nothing. When did I get the concept of basically being nothing? The earliest mentioning that to me was some nice OT 40 guy (yes, RO). Nice guy. I miss him. But I didnt believe him. I read more about it in Spiritologie. More logically put there, and closer to my knowingness. It became certainty by practice/experience. I know my potential is free and has always been to the degree I dont have confusions about the ‘me’ –identify with things and such.
Sorry if I missed the answer! But since you now bring up “some nice OT 40 guy” in RO, was there some word or term that was used that you didn’t get? What pops up in your mind on that question?
I dont think so. You have some certainty that I have an MU. The guy simply mentioned a thetan exteriorising and thinking “am i nothing”. How come you are certain I have an MU? You have said that before and I wanted to break it down so you will get whatnI mean. You think I have perplexion about thetan and static. Fine. Does the I am not, but I can be, fill any vacuums of understanding?
No, my dear Spyros, it’s not that I have “certainty” that you have an MU. It’s just that you seem to have attention on a particular subject area. But I don’t know for sure if you have an MU or not. You say I have said that before? Really? I don’t remember that.
Anyway, I wanted to check it out because in my experience with a lot of students, when they continue to have attention in a certain area, or it becomes complicated or complex, there usually is something they didn’t get just before that started. So I thought that if that were the case, I might be able to help you find it and clear it up.
You made a general statement that you “disagree that improvement is possible” – but it seems to me that you should be able to resolve what is being referred to in Scientology by “improvement.” You aren’t exactly a dummy. 😉
And yes, “I am not, but I can be” is quite understandable. Overall, I have had no problem understanding what you’ve been saying – but I still don’t quite know why this has become an issue for you. But I’m all ears. 😛
OK M, now Im not a student. Attention on something could mean any sort of charge. Its true that because of what I do, I try to understand this topic more and more. And some times I succeed other times I get frustrated. I have seen others revolving around topics for as long as ive been here but rarely somebody queries what their charge is. Instead counter-charge is added. I guess my topic has the peculiarity that it is unreal, naturally, as it doesnt pertain to reality. And so it gets more obvious (people reality-break with it).
I thought you thought I had an MU on the topics of thetan and static, whether you wrote it or not. If not so, then ok.
p.s. I have to end off for tonight. But in addition to anything else you might want to say, tell me more about what you said here: “The guy simply mentioned a thetan exteriorising and thinking ‘am i nothing’.” Did you get what he meant by that? And if so, please explain it to me. I’ll look for your answer tomorrow (my time)
Have a lovely day and don’t drink too much of that Turkish coffee – oops, I mean Greek coffee. 😛 😉
About the coses pr: I meant that I couldnt care less whether flag looks cool, and people wear smiles and whether it is offically a religion or not. Why would anybody join scn for that? The orientation film made me want to leave.
Improvement comes from shedding away what is relative, conditioned and impermanent. The word “atman” from Hinduism is translated as “soul” in English. But this is an incorrect translation. “Atman” is different from “soul” the way “doughnut hole” is different from the “doughnut.”
A soul is something. It is like the doughnut made up of thought material (ideas, visualizations, assumptions, etc.). But an atman is nothing. It has no substance. It is like the doughnut hole surrounded by the thought material of the doughnut.
A soul is that “I,” “will” or “intention” that one feels subjectively. It seems that there is a permanent self there. From this self-centric viewpoint, the ultimate reality is the “perfect self” of God. When undesirable thought material is purged and the soul is purified, it goes to heaven to be with God. The soul and God do not merge because different selves maintain their integrity.
However, an atman is surrounded by thought material that presents itself as a relative, conditioned and impermanent self. From this reality-centric viewpoint, one arrives at the ultimate reality by “neti, neti” (shedding all that is relative, conditioned and impermanent). As the conditioned reality of self is purged, atman merges with the ultimate reality.
So, soul becomes the best it can be, while atman sheds all its conditioning to return to what it basically was all along.
http://vinaire.me/2014/06/18/soul-versus-atman/
>
Vinaire: “So, soul becomes the best it can be, while atman sheds all its conditioning to return to what it basically was all along.”
This is what Spyros has been telling Marildi. He’s been expressing an existential opinion which doesn’t dovetail exactly with Scientology. She is helping with his MU’s before understanding his play on nothing.
Chris, are you looking at me through the same old filter – in this case, assuming that I think Spyros has an MU because what he said doesn’t dovetail (in your opinion) with Scientology?
First of all, I did understand his play on “nothing” – from the first time he used the word. And secondly, I didn’t interpret what he said as not “dovetailing” with Scientology – I thought it basically did. So even if I did misduplicate him, it wasn’t because it “didn’t dovetail with Scientology.
Please re-read the comments without any filters, and you’ll see that the substance of his views had nothing to do with what I was looking at. I explained to him what that was.
*of course, if you dont take correction by people who know you better than you know yourself, YOU are service faced, and YOU think you ‘know everything’. You see how criticism is only criticism of oneself. Its funny to view that scenery from the outside, but I dont want to play –to admit drama and stupidity so others will feel better about themselves. All thats not about Marildi. Ive had many fights about this topic in the past.
Spyros, here is one description of what I have understood from you. Tell me if this fits or not:
“The most common confusion on the part of a preclear is between himself as an identified object and his beingness. One’s beingness depends upon the amount of space which he can create or command, not upon his identification or any label.
“Identity as we know it in the MEST universe is much the same as identification, which is the lowest form of thought. When one is an object and is himself an effect, he believes that his ability to be cause is dependent upon his having a specific and finite identity. This is an aberration; as his beingness increases his individuality increases, and he quickly rises above the level of necessity for identity for he is himself self-sufficient with his own identity.”
Marildi, yes and no. The quote describes states of being, starting from being space to identifying with objects, while considering that he is being in MEST. It is still included in the agreed upon illusion of MEST. Space and objects are alike creations. The creator is neither 🙂
Got you. But we have to remember that LRH also said that “LIfe is basically a static.
Keeping that in mind, here’s another paragraph that seems like what you have been expressing:
‘On the Chart of Attitudes which accompanies the Handbook for Preclears, it will be found at 22.0 “I am myself.” The only true identity is “myself.” It is not a name, it is not a designation. Orders, titles, ranks, praise and enduring fame alike do not bring about the condition “I am” or an actual identity; they bring about instead an identification, with all the liabilities of identification. The finality of identification is 0.0 or lower on the tone-scale.’
In my opinion there is no absolute static as Hubbard assumed the ‘ability to perceive and postulate’ to be. This ability is neither static nor absolute. It does not exist in total isolation, just like Cause cannot exist in total isolation all by itself. Cause is relative to effect.
>
The Theory of Relativity shows that space does not exist independently as some absolute along with time. Space and Time are aspects of Motion. Only by creating motion one creates space and time. So, I have no idea how one can create and command just “space”!
>
*better swap ‘creator’ for ‘source’. As creator sounds more like a person. Also the decision ‘to be’ does not imply any space nor objects. Its just a decision.
Like in The Factors?
“In the beginning and forever is the decision and the decision is TO BE.”
Btw, I’m not trying to indicate that you necessarily agree with everything LRH – I don’t always do so myself. I’m just using his words to compare your views with so I can see if I have understood you – or if not, to get a better understanding of what it is you want to say.
Yes no prob. Im aware of the axioms and factors, but when I told you nothing cannot be improved (nor worsened) you disagreed. That which has no mass and location is space and time, that which has no space, no mass, no time (its all out if the axioms –not just the first) cannot have case either. Case is MEST.
No-no, I had no disagreement with the idea that “nothing” cannot be improved – and I agree with you that this would even be illogical to say.
Where I was coming from was that you often seem to be protesting something in that subject area and I never could get what it was exactly – since I don’t think LRH disagreed with you (nor do I).
Sometimes the topic of conversation is in the realm of the physical universe and you seem to disagree with what is being said because that universe is illusory. Well, even if it is illusory, the subject under discussion is understood to be in that frame of reference – as being illusory – so I didn’t get why you were protesting. That’s why I thought there might be an MU.
Maybe you just haven’t been understood and acknowledged for whatever point you’re trying to make. If so, please tell me what I have missed so I can duplicate and acknowledge you – sincerely! 😛 😉
Ok. I havent disagreed only with you about this. Its a disagreement between myself and I primarily. Secondarily, between me and SCNists. Its also a logical paradox to agree over nothing (lol). I think Marty now shares similar viewpoints with me, and Chris too, saying the self is a construct. But I think SCNists in their majority dont. I dont know whether you have brought this subject up, but I have and its as if I was speaking Chinese to them. That LRH knew about it, is a different thing. LRH also said to not seek revenge and ridge with hate, but some say to crash and destroy SPs. So they destroy each other. Nuff said.
Okay, great. Here what I’d like you to say more about:
1.”It’s a disagreement between myself and I primarily.” How so?
2. “I think Marty now shares similar viewpoints with me, and Chris too, saying the self is a construct.”
It depends what you mean by “self.” I am quite certain that Marty does not equate “self” with “thetan,” and I don’t think Chris does either (but I’ll let him speak for himself on that).
As per many LRH references “self” as an IDENTIFICATION with some thing or things does not refer to the thetan at all. That self is simply what the thetan has identified with – it’s not the being.
I meant that a being is the effect of the decision to be. The 8D creates itself as a being. And we call that 7D. I think Marty and Chris agree that individual spirits are creations.
That disagreement between myself and I was a confusion about what I am. I mean I used to think that as a being Im part of the body’s collective perceptions and thoughts. Now Im totally ‘out’ –actually, nowhere.
1. You wrote: “I mean I used to think that as a being I’m part of the body’s collective perceptions and thoughts.”
Well, I’m glad that you “used to think” that and no longer do. 😉 And again, I truly acknowledge you for now being “out.” 🙂
2. I’m not into debating what others think, since that shouldn’t have any bearing on what you and I think anyway. Plus. I need to get on to other things.
But I really enjoyed the discussion with you, Spyros, my friend. (And they said it couldn’t be done – an true discussion on a blog! LOL 😛 😉 )
Thank you. If you want to make me more solid (identity) im like a ‘step 1’, now that im thinking about it. I can be two feet behind and on mars and wherever –no kidding. I havent tried to lift my body with beams, though 😛 And again all that I write come out of the mind. You press a button, and a whole program runs. It can arcx too. I cant. If I havw something, I no longer have it. Makes sense?
Spyros: “I think Marty now shares similar viewpoints with me, and Chris too, saying the self is a construct…” Of course, self is a construct, and so is static, as my last few posts indicate. This paradox is created by Hubbard by making a starting postulate that is inconsistent with reality.
>
I think you and most people think -like I used to think- that static used to be static and then it sort of changed into something else. I dont think so anymore. I mean if you imagine a world with people and stuff and you imagine being one of those persons and feel like you are him, doesnt mean you no longer are that which imagined that whole scene. Or in dreams you can play as a person too, but your are basically the dreamer. You dont belong there. But in a way, that whole thing is you. You be it –all of it. You be the bad guys too.
Looks like you were answering my question at the same time as I was asking it. 😛
Okay, now were getting down to the heart of the matter. My understanding of static is simply that there is no quantitative factor (MEST) but that there is ability. Specifically, static has the ability to postulate and to create – and for that reason, it could create for itself location and space and energy. As well, it can BE anything it decides to be – including being another person or persons. LRH has stated all this too – and also said (as you just did) that at the same time you are still YOU.
Are we in sync? Or what?
To be aware of space and mest and other beings and stuff you need to have a point through which you perceive. You can identify with that too. Its an ability. But what happens to that viewpoint doesnt happen to the static. I think indiciduation is closely tied to points of perception. I look into that. For the moment I know whatever charge I perceive, vanishes. So the point of view of the body is totally different to mine. Actually i dont have any fixed point of view anywhere. I have to create pnw, after i create myself as a being. That decision ‘to be’ did not contain time.
Wow, I got all that. Except for what you meant by “I create myself as a BEING” – unless by BEING you are not referring to the static but to a thetan who is operating in the physical universe. Then I get it.
Other than that – it sounds to me like you are a pretty OT dude. Thank you so much for sharing that with me! And if there is an Examiner you could go to, IMHO I think you should go there and have your abilities fully acknowledged. 😉
I havent tried to do things directly tp mest much. I once created a sound my body could hear, another time i found my lost keys, often i heal my body (trouble), other times i can create sceneries in life. That ot? Ok. Anyone can do it. But no body.
Be well, see you later, thanx much. Going for caffeine 🙂
Miranda, now you see why I kept saying the same over and over? As I see it, all those rules that were attached onto the subject of ‘thetan’, don’t exist. That’s what I wanted to point out all this time. All those limitations and case might exist for a construct (the construct itself is the limitation in the first place, over which other limitations get attached). I believe you could process a man, but its pointless to process a spirit –and silly too. You process nothing but the decision to be, if you do so. What for? I think you know this too. Just understand the point I was trying to make. I’m feeling tired about this now.
Yes, Spyros, I do understand the point you were trying to make.
(But don’t call me Miranda. LOL – I can tell you were tired. 😛 )
You quit calling me Cyprus as well 😛
I never once called you Cyprus! 😛 I even spell your name correctly (not Spiros, or something).
I sometimes call you SP, though. :D.
Anyway, it’s all Greek to me. 😛
Fair enough, as some times I am SP too. But you have called me Sypros at least 2-3 times 😛
Those were typos!
I just did a word search on this thread and I did spell it that way – one time. But maybe it happened on other threads too. So okay, I guess we’re even. 😛
Marildi: “My understanding of static is simply that there is no quantitative factor (MEST) but that there is ability. Specifically, static has the ability to postulate and to create ”
The moment one speaks of “a static” that “has” an ability, one is turning static into a MEST terminal.
>
Spyros: “I think you and most people think -like I used to think- that static used to be static and then it sort of changed into something else…”
Hubbard uses ‘static’ as a terminal. The inconsistency is that a terminal is something relative when it is part of a communication matrix. It can be absolute only when there are no other terminals and no communication and no matrix.
That would imply that the only static is ‘this universe’ when considered as a single system with nothing beside it.
>
As far as I know by reading, he rarely used ‘static’. He mostly used what the static created (thought) itself to be –a preclear, a kinetic spiritual unit, anything else. ‘Static’ is nothing, nada, it is nowhere, it is not, it has not. I rest my case about it.-
Marildi: “*better swap ‘creator’ for ‘source’. As creator sounds more like a person. Also the decision ‘to be’ does not imply any space nor objects. Its just a decision.”
Even ‘source’ would be a node in a communication matrix. There is no absolute starting point in a matrix. All nodes are relative to each other. So a ‘source’ would be relative.
>
“The most common confusion on the part of a preclear is between himself as an identified object and his beingness. One’s beingness depends upon the amount of space which he can create or command, not upon his identification or any label…”
Marildi provided the above quote from LRH in a response to Spyros.
When I look at the concept of a preclear from a reality-centric viewpoint, beingness appears to be a matrix of beliefs through which logic flows. Any identity is part of this beingness.
The idea of “creating and commanding space” seems to me “creating and commanding those beliefs and logics that make up the preclear.” That is a very tall order.
>
“*of course, if you dont take correction by people who know you better than you know yourself, YOU are service faced, and YOU think you ‘know everything’… ”
Spyro, I am trying to understand what you said from a reality-centric viewpoint where selves are looked at just nodes in a communication matrix. From this viewpoint the ideas of ‘know better’ and ‘correction’ go away because of relativity. What remains is some sort of an inconsistency.
So, communication particles are produced at nodes by their internal circuitry. It seems that this communication is there to resolve something either in terms of belief or logic.
>
If you say thetans have no case the chairs and the bank accounts of the scn status/money networks shake. You’re not supposed to say that. There must be something wrong with the thetan. Just like psychoscientists keep finding things wrong with people. Same stuff, different labels. I want nothing to do with that SCN psychotherapy anymore nor their offbeats. All those merchants of chaos, and the naive people who believe them. All those OTs that are haunted by enemies. Even a logical person would see the contradicitions. It doesn’t take any OTness to do so.
Excume me. To make a logicaly bridge between what I said and the topic of logic: I just meant the those ‘high levels’ of thought are accessible anytime. Logic can be what it can be and could be closer and further from truth. But data are never truth itself. So yeah, np right/wrong about it.
Is this in answer to the question I had regarding your “disagreement with the concept of improvement”?
No it was an explanation and additive to what I had written just before.
Logic happens to be individualistic. It depends on how the self-node is wired.
>
Looking for source is self-centric. Looking for consistency and coherency is reality-centric.
>
If you think a self-Identity is Source.
In my opinion, source has to be a terminal; and attention focused on any terminal is self-centric. A reality-centric viewpoint will see a terminal as merely a sequence in a number of relationships.
Source gives a sense of being absolute because one assumes that there is no sequence prior to the source; but in my opinion there is no absolute starting point. It is all relative.
>
I see how you see it. It is then also a matter of what one means when he says self and reality. I too dont agree that its all a matter of viewpoint. I say that in the sense if something doesnt feel good to me, instead of trying to make myself feel good about it, I will either skip it or try to handle it. Trying to feel good about everything could be used to make people feel good about unethical things, too. Hint hint.
When one is talking about feeling good or bad, one is talking about a self reacting to something. It is a self-centric viewpoint. It is not reality-centric.
In a reality-centric viewpoint there is no subjectivity. There is only a system to be understood.
Sorry I meant to write that it depends what each person means by source.
You hear a dog barking and obviously the source of the barking is the dog. Maybe another could go deeper and assume a GE is making the dog bark. Ok, but how come that dog and GE exist anyway? Whats their source?
http://vinaire.me/2013/02/26/source-a-scientology-power-process/
.
Vin, many answers. I’ll try to compress mine.
I’m aware of the source power process in SCN, what’s you point?
Like I said before, another might not have the idea you have about self plus reality.
My feelings -as an individual- do not pertain only to myself, as an individual. If I do something onto somebody, I might get (create) a feeling about it. It isn’t about me, really. Feelings can work as a compass. And not all are reactions. They can be, if you create so.
Also Hubbard is not the only one who wrote about Static. He just called it Static. I don’t see anything illogical about it, as it doesn’t pertain to the physical, logical universe. I don’t think logic and spirituality go together.
I was watching my middle son’s piano lesson today and he was being frustrated with not playing a piece “perfectly.” Though his teacher had been complimenting his progress, he was feeling negative. His piano teacher asked if he felt that he was a perfectionist and my son replied, “I guess so.” So after the lesson, I had a talk with my son about “perfectionism” as a type of anxiety rather than a high standard. In my life, I’ve noticed that when my skill is lacking then my perfectionism (as a negative emotion) increases and when my skill and confidence increases then this anxiety of perfectionism decreases. I may not have expressed this very well, I hope you get the idea and that if you ever have any inadequate feelings toward your performance or skill that you can begin letting that go and simply concentrate on practicing your skill and acknowledge your improvements when they occur.
Excellent approach!
+1 … like it when you write about your life, Chris! This word
‘acknowledge’ can be seen playfully like this: ‘a’ ‘knows’ what ‘a’
‘can’ do and that knowing is enough to feel good about it.
That good feeling is the basis for further practice…so, giving attention to that and only to that the negative is going to be
less and less if it appears at all. You see, one can allow oneself
to feel good, to be right in the moment. It has a ‘power’. That power, as one is practising, doing what one likes, is getting wider
and wider as one’s skills are developing (are brought from latency
toward fulfillment).
(by ‘a’ i mean the person)
Thanks Marianne! 🙂
Marianne, Here’s another alter ego for me, just for fun! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kc17H68IKMs
Marildi to Spyros: “Wow, I got all that. Except for what you meant by “I create myself as a BEING” – unless by BEING you are not referring to the static but to a thetan who is operating in the physical universe. Then I get it.”
Creating myself as a Being could only mean, “setting up a matrix of beliefs and relational logic, and making it a node in a larger communication matrix.”
What is this “I” that does that? If “I” is also defined as a being then we have a situation of infinite regression again.
So, I don’t think there is any “I” creating a being. From a reality-centric viewpoint, beings, or self-nodes, are created by some spiritual law beyond the subjective feeling of “I”.
Vin: “Creating myself as a Being could only mean, “setting up a matrix of beliefs and relational logic, and making it a node in a larger communication matrix.”
SP: If you created to be that, that you would be. 😛
Spyros: agreed. Fully.
Me likes 🙂
Spyros to Marildi: “I meant that a being is the effect of the decision to be. The 8D creates itself as a being. And we call that 7D. I think Marty and Chris agree that individual spirits are creations.”
Who or what makes the “decision to be”? What is this 8D really?
Yes, spirits and thetans are all constructs. Even the static is a construct when thought of as a terminal. So what is this ability “to postulate and perceive”? It is awareness. And what is awareness aware of? The answer is itself.
And how does awareness sees itself? It sees itself as a disturbance akin to light.
Disturbance in what? Well, all we can do is postulate an undisturbed primordial field at this point. It is beyond awareness because awareness appears only when this field is disturbed.
Marildi to Spyros: “1. You wrote: “I mean I used to think that as a being I’m part of the body’s collective perceptions and thoughts.
Well, I’m glad that you “used to think” that and no longer do. 😉 And again, I truly acknowledge you for now being “out.” :)”
Awareness cannot occur without being aware of itself as light. Light is some primordial harmonic of electromagnetic phenomenon.
It is awareness and light that weave to make any object including the body. So, a live body has awareness weaved into it. It is not necessarily a definite conclusion that body is operated by a thetan that is separate from it.
When body dies what disappears is the consistency and coherence among all the awareness weaved into DNA molecules. The molecules fall apart into having individual molecular awareness vectors that are no longer consistent with each other as a coherent whole. So, the “sprit departs.”
Spirit in a live body is simply the consistency and coherence of the awareness weaved into it.
.
Vin, this doesn’t go to you, alone. But since you mentioned it. I believe the more can/cant, must/mustnt, is/is not, one adds (me too) the further away he goes from FREE POTENTIAL. It is my own absolutely humble opinion that potential is just potential. And if you think you’re light, light you are. If you think you’re body, the same, and so on. I don’t see why to debate this, like it is some truth or reality that I know and you dont know. If you understand free potential, you understand it can be anything. So, no reason to pound anything.
Spyros to Marildi: “Thank you. If you want to make me more solid (identity) im like a ‘step 1′, now that im thinking about it. I can be two feet behind and on mars and wherever –no kidding. I havent tried to lift my body with beams, though 😛 And again all that I write come out of the mind. You press a button, and a whole program runs. It can arcx too. I cant. If I havw something, I no longer have it. Makes sense?”
This kind of thinking that comes from Scientology and similar subjects is actually nothing more than visualization in my estimation. Now there may be different levels of visualization. It would be interesting to explore them.
.
Vinaire: “This kind of thinking that comes from Scientology and similar subjects is actually nothing more than visualization in my estimation.”
Doesn’t “this kind of thinking” (regarding paranormal abilities) also come from Buddhism?
“The siddhis as paranormal abilities are considered emergent abilities of an individual that is on the path to siddhahood…”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siddha
Marildi: Doesn’t “this kind of thinking” (regarding paranormal abilities) also come from Buddhism?
“The siddhis as paranormal abilities are considered emergent abilities of an individual that is on the path to siddhahood…”
.
I am sure. It is all subjective and part of conditioning.
It is all part of the reality filter. And this also comes from Buddism… 🙂
Aspiration for siddhis is looked upon as a barrier to Nirvana. .
>
Your “certainty,” as usual, seems to be based on nothing more than figure-figure.
It isn’t a matter of “ASPIRATION for” siddhis – it’s that these paranormal abilities do develop even among Buddhists and Hindus and others – regardless of the wide variance of cultural “conditioning.” You are rejecting the accounts of many, many people for thousands of years – based on nothing but conjecture.
And btw, how does your conjecture escape the accusation of being based on conditioning?
Spyros to Marildi: “I havent tried to do things directly tp mest much. I once created a sound my body could hear, another time i found my lost keys, often i heal my body (trouble), other times i can create sceneries in life. That ot? Ok. Anyone can do it. But no body.
.
I wonder if spirit, defined as “consistency and coherence of awareness” can exists without DNA molecules, or a live body, through which that awareness is weaved.
I doubt that very much. Body is essential for a spirit to be there.
A live body cannot be there without spirit; and spirit cannot be there without a body to weave through.
.
“I wonder…I doubt…”
Vinnie, your wondering and doubting are other ways of describing conjecture.
A number of posters both here and on Marty’s blog keep trying to tell you that fundamental knowledge can’t be attained from “thinking”.
It seems you do far more figuring than observing. I would guess that for this reason not many people pay attention to or even read your outpouring of pronunciamentos
Thinking has its place but consider – just consider – the possibility that some things can’t be “figured out” but are only learned from direct observation and experience.
Marildi: “Vinnie, your wondering and doubting are other ways of describing conjecture.”
Yes. It is the same thing as postulating. The truth is determined by the consistency and coherency of postulate (speculation, conjecture, hypothesis,etc.) with one’s belief system and with reality. Obviously, what I wrote is not consistent with your belief system. I understand that. However, I don’t find it to be inconsistent with reality. It is not confirmed by reality yet.
Marildi: “A number of posters both here and on Marty’s blog keep trying to tell you that fundamental knowledge can’t be attained from “thinking”.
Isn’t postulating part of thinking?
Marildi: “It seems you do far more figuring than observing. I would guess that for this reason not many people pay attention to or even read your outpouring of pronunciamentos”
This part is a violation of discussion policy and an unnecessary distraction. People violate discussion policy when they can’t rationally argue the point presented.
.
>
No, the part you refer to was a comment on your VIEWS. But when you yourself “can’t rationally argue the point presented” your REACTION is to claim that has to do with you personally and call it a violation of policy. It invalidates what you are saying – not you – but to you that is “personal.”
Also, there’s nothing wrong with postulating the existence of whatever – scientists and others do that all the time. But they follow those up with observations! And then if the observations don’t support their postulates, they toss the postulates out.
Anyway, I need to get going. I just had to post an objection to you making nothing of things that Spyros’ and others’ are capable of – and you do it with no substantial support, just your figurings.
Right on.
Or – they are trying to help you by pointing out an inconsistency in you. You may reject that by waning some home cooked policy.
All I can say is that you guys are not ready yet. 🙂
Oh sir holier than thou.
What arrogance.
Hold on Geir! Vinay’s right! ‘WE’ guys have NOT yet reached the stage he has, in order to be “ready yet!” (To argue interminably, about everything!!) 🙂
Well, that’s true…
:thumbsup:
I do appreciate Spyros and Marildi helping me form my hypothesis. It is reality-centric as opposed to Scientology’s self-centric approach.
Yogic Potentials and Capacities, or siddhis, in Hindu-Buddhist Psychology.
http://www.chinabuddhismencyclopedia.com/en/index.php?title=Yogic_Potentials_and_Capacities,_or_siddhis,_in_Hindu-Buddhist_Psychology
Wow, Vin, this is an awesome list of spiritual abilities.
You’re very welcome..soooo much still to learn!
>
An Announcement. (obituary)
Today, Saturday 21, at 2.00 pm, in a personal gathering of family and his best friends, at Brighton Beach, Durban, South Africa, we said our final goodbyes to Allen Cook, when his sons, Mark, and Jody and daughter, Nicole scattered his ashes into the surf, as the rest of us bore witness.
Allen Cook, 69 years young, had his body give out after fighting the dormant stages of cancer for almost 10 years, finally succumbing to the past 3 months of the aggressive stage, where it became terminal.
Allen was one tough SOB, let me tell you, with an unshakable , REAL confront, that was capable of standing up to anyone or anything.Trained up to Class IV Auditor, and topped out at OT IV, was just a smattering of what this beautiful being, accomplished.
All his brothers, sister, and mom, had also done various stages of training and processing up ‘The Bridge’. Though for me, personally, having known Allen for over 40 years, he was not only my best personal friend and confidante, but shared his vast ability to ‘read’ beings, and situations, in order to avert going down a ‘wrong road’, in favor of the better one.
He lived no cloistered life, and lived it to the full. Like me, he was extremely physically competitive by nature, though excelling in trampoline, diving, swimming and life-saving (literally helping countless people with this ‘last’ item, by way of guidance in straightening out their lives.)
I mentioned a few months ago, that I heard someone shouting my name, as I was leaving the local mall. Looking back, it was Al. I hadn’t seen him for about 4 months. (Unusual, since I normally saw him at least once a week for the past many years.
We helped each other regularly, with our particular strengths and specialities.
For me, as a once gym-owner/personal trainer, (now only part time, though.) that meant taking a now tired looking, sluggishly weakened personal friend, and asking him bluntly, what was wrong? — “No energy” was the reply. For a while, I had realized that he had been on a gradual decline, but also knew that he preferred not to even consider medical examinations, so it was futile to try to convince him otherwise.
Giving him what I knew could at least, put him back on a road to some strength and energy, we worked out a high protein and supplement regimen, including certain essential vitamins, to support an immediate physical conditioning program. Within a week, he had shown marked improvement, and within a month, dramatically so.
What I wasn’t to know, was the item he had been suppressing for over ten years, (dormant cancer), had taken hold of one of the lungs, and now was malignant, and in the final aggressive stage.
Fighting the disease, takes the stuffing out of anyone, of course.
and Allen refused chemo & radiation, on the basis that he had seen “what a waste of money it is, to then just die anyway.”
The disease, needless to say, had by now ravaged the entire body, with breathing suffering the most.
He passed on, in hospital after a coma, while still hooked up to a ventilator, last Monday 16 th June, in the early hours.
What a great guy! Of course, we will miss him… though he has already made contact with my wife, Dorothy, to say he is “fine, and no longer in pain, and just glad to be free.” He did add that he soon will be leaving us,as he wants to get into a “new game.”
We got that, Al! Thanks for the privilege of being able to know and share in your life — it was an honor!
At this time, come the words of Khalil Gibran, in “The Prophet”
…”A while, a rest upon the wind, and another woman shall bear me.”
Yeah, bro’ till then,
your loving friends, Calvin & Dot.
Very nice tribute, Calvin. I wish your friend Allen a wonderful new game.
Thanks, Marildi. To be candid with you —- “vee haf vays und means uf finding outt vatt he iss upp too, jawol!!!!” 🙂
I believe you! I too have experienced such things. 🙂
Good thoughts and warm wishes to Calvin and Dorothy as they miss their friend Allen Cook. It is good to remember our family and friends who spent their lives well and in service to others. They are missed, and for me, it is right to miss them.
Thanks Chris. Your kind words are very appreciated. The sadness of having one ‘leave’ (‘permanently’) is only natural and as you say, “it is right to miss them.” 🙂
Has anybody ever heard that somebody’s case ENDED? Noooooo case is always and forever. Even if you don’t have any, you have but you don’t know it. Like your friends psychiatrists say ‘everyone is crazy but they don’t know it’ and it never ever heals anyway.
Why don’t you be honest to your customers and tell them they’re going to engage into something that will never end? And also don’t forget to mention that it never ended for you either. But I shouldn’t say anything because ‘at least you do something about it (hateful grin)’. Yeah you do something about making money. Because your founder once mentioned ‘exchange’ and that’s what he meant. He meant if your fellow has no money, leave him alone to rot. Suck only those who have juice to give. Play friends, smile and know better. Good old successful recipe. You’re funny. OTs that run incidents…forever. You create a problem, you handle it, and you win. How awesome. I bet nobody has anything better to do with his life. That’s why when somebody asks you how it will be like to be OT, you say “You will see”.
I just received a communication, and responded. Going back to minding my own ‘business’. I couldn’t help it, when somebody accused me of the things he himself did, to not point out that he himself did it (‘you know better’, ‘you are superior’ etc). It’s a characteristic of psychosis to accuse the other for the exact things you do, even the moment you do them.
Call me bad. I guess I can be bad, too.
Of course, Spyros! Even if it genuinely HAS ended. (simply through the method/s described by Geir, through his ‘creative’ opening post topic, or by any OTHER ‘approach’, that works), there are simply going to going to be those who just CANNOT possibly, ever ‘have’ that, no matter how far you sink into theta apathy, trying to convince them? / or them arguing with you, that “you cannot be free of case, unless you have had blahblahblah run on you, as determined by XYZ!!”
Elron’s one AXIOM (on ‘duplication’), put it this way:
“Unwillingness to be an effect,” -(of communication),- “is monitored by an unwillingness to duplicate.”
Neat, hey? 🙂
Another way of ‘approaching’ this, has worked magic for me:
— You can “breathe life’, into anything under the Sun, or NOT, —it really IS determined through your own volitional choice.”
Nobody argued with me. Many in here argue, and although I don’t think it’s the best game possible, it can still be honest. But to sit outside, in a throne of know-better, being above others, not allowing any effect because you have a holy purpose and blaming others for the exact things you do is bitty on the ‘whatever’ side.
You seem to have some confusion regarding apathy and conviction.
*I dont understand where the rest you said fit, If you answered something I said, let me know.
Maybe we should be more specific so that innocent wont get hurt. When somebody utters an opinion that is contrary to another’s an that other quickly invalidates with with some slimy tone because he knows better, and he -above that- says “yeaaah you know better”. He out to go back to his COS, dethrone COB and rule the world. Because it seems to me some people’s problem with COB is just that he rules and they dont. Now, if you will, tell me what theta apath etc youre talking about, and where that lrh quote fits cause Im totally lost.
Okay, okay, Spyros. Firstly, thank you for laying that all out here, as emphatically as you have.
Secondly, since I prefer to be ‘up front’ (though light-hearted), let me be perfectly blunt with you!! –There has been a massive miss, on what I had tried to deliver to you.(the intent)didn’t arrive.
Thirdly, ‘Invalidate? “slimy tone”? throne? above others? holy purpose? blaming others for the exact things you do? confusion? apathy/conviction? — LOL! wtf is all that? Now I’m totally lost!
Fourthly, I GENUINELY like and admire your postings, and always have, Spyros!! Do you get that? Straight?? 🙂
Fifthly, (and straight to your point), the ‘apath etc’, is simply my own personal observation of what (I noticed) tends to happen to any ONE of us, on this (or any other) blog, when we tend to get more and more exasperated, simply by trying so hard to get another to ‘understand’ what it is, we’re trying to say. 🙂
(btw, this is exactly where the lrh quote fits, ie “duplication.”)
Hope this helps our (two-way) ‘duplication’, too, bro’?? 🙂
Ok. I wrote much yesterday, and not sure to which of all you replied. Some times I use a wordpress app for my tablet, and although it shows the reply, it doesnt show what had been written before. Because I spit some criticism towards somebodies yesteday (maybe I generalised too much) I thought you replied to that. But generally, I didnt make much sense of what you wrote 😛 So thanx for clarifying 🙂
I can get thoroughly charged (collective charge, if you know whatnI mean) while discussing in blogs. Though I have interest in the topics, the communication can get hard. Add the comm lag, and it can become arduous.
Moment…I need to read the rest pf what you wrote –darn app 😛
Ok, now I got what you said before, too. And thanx for your kindness and for not adding more to the misunderstanding. For the past 1,5 year, I have fought badly with 3-4 people. Good score, or do I need anger management? The irony is Ive been like a harmless sheep most of my life. But people in here think Scientologists are berserkers. Do you think its their considerations that make me act as such? 😛
OK, I have quit trying to be understood when there is resistance –well not completely, but I intend to. I think to force understanding aint that cool, no matter the odds. Its not respecting the other’s self determinism. If somebody wants to do something to himself that you even might consider harmful, you cant force him to stop.
Anyway, back to the topic: There can be many ways I guess. Each one may choose whats best for him. I could had jumped onto the ideas I ‘have’ now long ago, but maybe I needèd to learn something –just maybe. And maybe in the future I might say the samen about the ideas I ‘have’ now. Not all in my life is perfect. Theres room for improvement. I just no longer thinknthe spirit itself needs improvement. I see it as the solution, not the problem. 🙂
There you go!….Me glad for you too, Spyros 🙂
Ok, I got what you said in the previous message as well. And thanx for your kindness and for not adding to the misunderstanding.
I have fought 3-4 times hard the past 1,5 year in blogs and mostly due to either misunderstanding or the other misunderstanding me.
Geir is creating his own way, and others theirs and me mine and others do scn, and it’s alright, I guess. I only dont like it when one disrespects the other, and when there are dishonest intentions involved (like monies). I think if you intend to help, you can help. Do you agree? Exchange can be ok too, if it is not the main purpose. I just couldnt ask dor money to help someone in need. It doesnt feel right to me.
There you go…Me glad for you too, Spyros! 🙂
Dammit, sorry about this guys. Geir, it’s my apps fault to post the -almost- same reply over and over (it told me it didn’t post the darn reply before grrrr). If you want, delete it, or leave it, or delete them all or whatever 😛
I too dont know the truth. Im excited to have found something I consider fantastic. Its in scn, spt, in Buddhism and probably elsewhere too, but I think it goes unoticed. When I put it to good use it is so awesome. But its also not un-earthly. I personally tried so hard all this time, to do it ‘right’. I couldnt demand that others should grasp it because I say so. Maybe each one of us starts from the point he fells most comfortable from, and does what he thinks best and learns what he needs. I know some want to ply games in life that I dont. So, I wont play along, but they can play. I used to be in the cos too you know. And I have made overts too and stuff and well…you learn 🙂
Brilliantly put across, Spyros, and that refers to all 3 of the above posts. I agree wholeheartedly with much of your sentiments, too. btw.
Apart from the obvious ‘barriers’ to be overcome with blogcom,
there also enters in the element of trying to get a ‘mock up’, of who we are trying to communicate with, on the other end. A personality, that we try to conjure up, that represents ‘who’ we think we’re dealing with? Talk about alter is? LOL.!!!
At best, one can usually only come up with an ‘approximation’, of who we think ‘that’ person ‘is’! …And then, one fine day, perhaps, we finally meet them, ‘in the flesh’! … to say one can be ‘flabbergasted’, is just a total understatement, since it’s happened to me a few times, very often leaving me both bemused and surprised at how far ‘off’, the mock-up was!
Having said all this, at length (sorry, btw), I feel that is even more imperative, to compensate for the lack of ‘reality’ (where it exists)
of the ‘other’, by being MORE forgiving, MORE willing to grant beingness, MORE willing to duplicate the other’s comm, and of course, lastly and most importantly, WHERE, they be coming from, in terms of their actual, or perceived circumstances.
Lord knows, we can even have enormous problems with people we ‘know’ and try to communicate with in !’real time’ LOL!
Spyros, I loved in particular, the bit where you have learned to ‘as is’ thoughts, as they occur, then the’re gone!
The ARC factor, is always (Axiomatically, yeah?) involved, in any given relationship, and ‘like’ it or not, has a bearing on ones’ relationship/s, especially over long distances / commlags, there being the formidable barriers they are.
I would just like to end this input, by making my current Scn attitude clear. For me personally, as with Geir, I had only positive interactions with Scn, and in particular, the astounding permanent gains, had from the TR’s /Comm course, All done prior to the Mi$cavige Era. The Ol’ man, for me, was the one I never had, (mine died when I was a 14 month-old baby) and the benefits I gained were enthusiastically received AND appreciated.
Much water has flowed UNDER ‘the bridge’, washing away as much, as forcefully flowing water is bound to do. I guess this is as true for me, as it apparently is for others too. Today,”Going UP The Bridge” no longer has that all consuming attraction It once did, though now I have pretty thorough grasp on that huge ‘toolbox’ of really useful tools, that can be used as needed, to fix practically any life / relationship ‘problem’. If not, then the willingness to consult those in the know, can usually wrap up the ‘as-isness to resolve the ‘dilemma’..
And of course…… there ARE other ‘toolboxes’, containing a myriad of other ‘tools’ , that are useful to those having practice and/or faith in the use those ‘miraculous’ other tools.
We could go on and on, but that’s this $2.00 worth!
…..and, thanks for reading,
Calvin, aka Ray, Racing, “C”, and any other label that ‘fits’ 🙂
Yes, I think I understand what you mean about SCN. My arguement with SCN criticism is that I think many of the people I met in SCN, are simply adjusted on a different scn wavelength than I was. One reads something, another reads the same, they get something different. I think the misunderstood words are one factor, another is what they themselves add to what they read –what their frame of mind is. Its the same as what can hapen with misunderstanding in blogs. I read your message before, I got the words alright, but because I thought you responded to a previous series of mock ups of mine, I put an entirely different meaning to it –but entirely! Someone I knew -for example- read DMSMH and figured that Clear had something to do with Nazism. –that it had to do with some sort of a mental superiority, that was similar to Nazism. He was heavily into politics, by the way. And he has already read SCN criticism prior reading DMSMH. Now, I imagine the tragic would be if someone considered Clear to be superior, while still a member of SCN. I think SCN suffered because of that, more than because of intentions to use it as a weapon. Because those would would use it to harm, are few in numbers, in my opinion. I too have grasped things not the way they were meant to be grasped by the author, from time to time, because I thought of it through the filter of the group’s mind or my own.
When we talk online (and not only) there can also be the factor of non phyical communication. I had been heavily into that, in the past, but not in a ‘theta’ way, but rather a ‘mind’ way. You know, circuits can communicate too. And although I say what I say about the being not needing to be processed etc I still use that composite being to operate the body. In scn 8-8008 after one had certainty that he can be (two feet behind etc) engaged to operate the body directly, without the via of the mind (like pulling its body parts from the outside). I havent done that step. But still I know such misunderstandings can occur only when I operate through the mind. When thetan takes charge, things fall magically into place –so I have noticed.
As far as Im concerned, speak freely and as much as you like, no prob, rather the opposite. And thanx again 🙂
Wow, Spyros! “…speak as freely as you like, no prob, rather the opposite. And thanx again. 🙂 ”
Now that’s one of the most unexpected acks, I’ve EVER had 🙂
gee?…thankyouthankyouthankyouthankyou! (yougeddit LOL )
Just so I don’t get all carried away and totally stfu, forever now, (LOL) or go opposite, as an unstoppable ‘comm release’, here’s:
!) True acknowledgement to you, as a really ‘cool’ being!
2) Sincere validation for your ‘uniqueness’ which shines through, for many of us to genuinely appreciate and enjoy. 🙂
3) Honest expression of the value of contributions you make, which lack any form of malice or nastiness, go a long way to keeping the ‘tone’ civil here, so thanx must go to you too!!
Now in addition, (since I’m on a roll), ways and means of growing as ‘beans’ (beings) are ripe for the picking, thanks to the nutritional ‘bones’ thrown by Geir, to mutts like me and “others?” right here on this blog.
— So –“woof, arf, yap, yap grr. hrmff arooo, sniff,sniff, dig, dig, harooo, dig dig, haroo, dig, dig, haroo!”. — translation: “Hey guys and gals, I think we’ve got a pretty cool ‘leader of the pack’ here. …..so here’s to Geir.
Hip hip, hooray! Hip hip, hooray! Hip hip, hooray!”
OOP’s Gone too long with this!… time to stfu. hey? 🙂
LOL, I like this happy doggy identity.
I thank you much for your good thoughts and intentions and I ack them too, but it isn’t true that I’m all that (specially the cool being). And I can be quite eevol too, if I decide too, or if I stupidity-ly think that I have to.
Glad that you are around 🙂
Hey Racer, why aren’t you answering Spyros? He’s been trying to get in comm with you. I think it would be the right thing to do to give him a reply, don’t you?
Frankly, there are things that each of you said that I didn’t fully get, myself! So it would be good to get them clarified.
As you know, communication dissolves all things – even in the cybersphere if the intention to do so is there. Right? 😉
p.s. to both of you. Need I remind you that part of the communication formula is to be duplicatable? 😛
And when I get up in the morning, hopefully my powers of duplication will be refreshed. 🙂
Nice start, Racer man. 🙂
What’s hard to tell sometimes with each of you is who is being referred to by what is being said.
Anyway, now I can hit the sack and look forward to some clarity in the morning.
Have a great day!
Yes, Marildi, And here’s hoping you DO have your intended quota (of zeee’s) LOL! One of the liabilities, that is exacerbated via ‘blog comm’, if you will, is that it is obviously not ‘real’ time, and that just just compounds the likelihood of ‘misduplication’, with the then resulting degree of said ‘exasperation’. Not so?
Perhaps though, it is helpful to adopt a more relaxed, somewhat lighthearted attitude during comm-sessions with others on any particular blog.?
At least, that has made sense to me, in my own approach.
“Seriousness” = mass = introversion = blame game = effect = lose. (A=A=A) LOL
“Laughter” = lightness = extroversion = fun = cause = win 🙂
To pick up where you left off Marildi, Please also have a great day, too! 🙂 Btw, I’m assuming that for me in South Africa, there is around 7- 8 hours advance, to where you are….(California?)
To get back to the point I made earlier, the ‘importance’ of high ARC, particularly over ‘barrier’ (& mis-duplication) prone cyber chats, I immediately think of two wonderfully gifted exponents in the craft of humor, (and it’s sometimes less appreciated cousins, sarcasm, and ridicule!).
— Mike Rinder, & MJ (the quick witted one-liner) on Mike’s blog.
Our ‘own’ Geir, has / does show an enormous capacity to just ‘get it’ in a milli-second, and leaves him completely free of the
‘mass’ that soooooo many Scn’s and ex’es evidently consider ‘mandatory’ to lug around in their personal ‘mass’ storage trunk’, (–just for the sake of filling a life of relative ’emptiness’, perhaps?)
Geir’s penchant (couldn’t help noticing,btw, from the instant I first visited this blog) really does not seem to permit him to sweat ANY of the small stuff, whatsoever. Indeed, the capacity to focus on simply ‘letting go’ (fuck it!) apparently has permitted him to fly through a myriad of ‘challenges’, at breakneck speed, to a point where one could confidently, if modestly say, he has ‘mastered’ the art of living one’s life pretty successfully? 🙂
But then again, what would “I” know?? hehehe 🙂
Communication intends to reach another and so other parts of oneself. These (e)motions are opportunities to upgrade one’s expression to forms of love, kindness, compassion, and acknowledgement of the importance of others in our lives as mirrors of our several aspects.
When we know how to listen, everyone is the guru. – Ram Dass
Well I’ll be Damned! .. Ram Dass, yet another guru, to swell the ranx! Thanx, Ram!
(just kidding you) 🙂
Only the last sentence was Ram’s 🙂
Hi A,
Haha…i have just had a talk with a friend who is very spiritual.
Yesterday he met a guy who started to be agressive towards him.
It surprised my friend and intuitively which he had never said aloud
before said to the guy ‘ I am not you’. The guy replied ‘But I am you’. My friend immediately cognited the ‘mirror’. In the end they
shook hands.
You have great posts A !
marianne
Hi Marianne,
Yes! isn’t love simply magic? 🙂
..oh yes! and inconsistency, creativity, intuitive knowingness which
has a surprise part…haha! hey! you ‘mirror’? haha…
😉
Hi A*
‘Communication intends to reach another and so other parts of oneself. These (e)motions are opportunities to upgrade one’s expression to forms of love, kindness, compassion, and acknowledgement of the importance of others in our lives as mirrors of our several aspects’.
I am reaching out now for you as i would like you to communicate
on…whatever is on your mind and heart, would you please put
it into expression here?
…i am putting here a vid…i don’t know if you like it…
Hello, Beautiful 🙂
Thank You for this song!
I hope You like this One:
What’s in my Mind and Heart?
All and nothing, love and pain, hope and sadness, light and shadow.
What’s in Yours…?
Hello Beautiful 🙂
Thank You for the song!
I hope you like this One:
What’s in my mind and heart?
Love and pain
Hope and sadness
All and nothing
Light and darkness…
What’s in yours…?
Hello Artie
The song touched into the core of my heart…to live like in the song is my aspiration…
Your poem inspired me to give you a name…what arose is Artie…
i haven’t heard this name before, i checked its meaning and origin, here is what i find:
http://www.ourbabynamer.com/meaning-of-Artie.html
http://www.kabalarians.com/Male/artie.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis
Hi Artie
‘What’s in yours?’ (in my mind and heart)
Listening to the song and reading your poem i got inspired, which
here means that a certain impersonal, spontaneous impulse arises to create something which, when it gets manifested, surprises me (the person called marianne). So, the first answer to
your question is that there was nothing on my mind and the name
‘i’ gave you arose from the ‘flow of life’ itself. Thank you for this
inspiration, i love the no-mind, source-like inter-actions.
My second answer is that i wrote ‘ to live like in the song is my
aspiration’. Since i wrote it down i have been feeling that it can be interpreted in different ways. What i meant was that being known,
being famous had never crossed my mind when doing something.
When i did or do something it is because i like doing it and when
another or some others are involved in it too, i do whatever it is
to the best of my knowledge, skills or, like in the above example
(giving you a name) listen to life-flow itself. As i have observed
it so far, these ‘leave a mark’ in Life ( perhaps we may call it karma). In the song it says ‘remarkable’ creature. To me it means
that me as any other person leaves a ‘mark’ with one’s presence
and actions in Life. Pure presence for me is attention-aliveness
inspiration, the deed is the quality of creation. So, my aspiration
is this two. To me what matters most is when i once leave this body, what i leave behind is aliveness and what i have created
(like some articles, book) may inspire some…that the name is
remembered is of no interest here….this clarification now is closer
to how i meant my above com.
Hi Marianne,
I am glad you like the song so much.
Arthur is a beautiful name and a great heart, and Artemis a life giving beautiful Goddess so thank you 🙂
Hi Artie,
i am also glad that you like it ! you have both qualities in one name now…interestingly it is also relevant to the thread’s title
‘Your life’…i like the name you have chosen for yourself too!
i am going to call you by both, depending what my intuition tells me when i read your com…the star has gone from your name,
is it intentional?
sometimes i change, that’s all 🙂
Change is cool! Not only ‘sometimes’, always!
change is a lot of things. and its timings depend on the view point and other factors 🙂
🙂
Death comes about when the continuity and coherence of awareness throughout the body is broken.
All atoms and molecules of the body go back to their individual, disconnected awareness. The life of the body, which existed due to connected awareness, disappears. This connectedness had earlier brought about processes, which now disappear.
Thus, there is no soul that leaves the body. It is simply the fact that the condition of life ceases to exist.
The condition of life does not come from a “soul controlling the body.”
The condition of life comes from the connected awareness of all atoms and molecules, which then allows awareness to flow throughout the body, making it act as a single organism.
A higher harmonic would be that of a community in which all members are connected by awareness, which then flows in a consistent and coherent manner throughout the community. We may peg the death of the community to the point in time when the individuals in the community go back to their individual, disconnected awareness.
In my opinion, Granting of Beingness would be letting something (or somebody) be what it is, and making no efforts to alter it by adding or subtracting to it.
You are not giving it life. It is what it is.
You are not creating energy. What is there is already there.
You are simply becoming aware of it.
By granting beingness you are not changing anything out there. You are simply becoming less judgmental.
http://vinaire.me/2012/07/28/granting-of-beingness-space/
.
Being judgmental defines the person who is being judgmental more than what he is being judgmental about.
Adding that observation itself, the fact of becoming aware of something does change the thing that is observed.
Observation is influenced by the filter. Whatever is influencing the observation is part of the filter.
Not what I meant 🙂
The observed thing changes due to another’s observation of it.
Let me see if I understand what you mean. Let’s say A is looking at P. Now B also starts looking at P. Then P will change for A.
Am I interpreting you correctly?
No. A observes B. And as a result B changes its properties. Properties of C and D may also change (if C and D are in an entangled state with B)
yes geir, that is what i experienced but could not put into as
clear concepts as you do now…thank you for doing it for me…
and all this can be seen energetically, we see the change in
the manifestations as more life, more movement, or less life
and less movement…this is my observation…
Geir, what sort of “properties” are changed? Will you please give a specific example.
Particle A is in a certain state (e.g. A state of undecided wave/particle dualty). The statevis altered by the fact of observation alone. Also, if particle B has an entangled state woth particle C, even if they are light years apart, if you flip particle A (spin “north” to “south”) , then instantly particle C also flips. Just as two examples here.
Okay, you’re talking about particles. This, I know about. But I thought the topic started with Vinaire’s comment about granting beingness to people by simply observing who/what they are. So I thought you were speaking in that context.
It might as well have been. Our put rethorically, why would it not be?
Are you basically saying that the particles in everything go back into a state of “decoherence” until they are observed again?
They seem to settle after being observed. What makes them “unobserved” again is unknown to me as of yet.
Attention?
>
Can you say more about how they “seem to settle” after being observed. And is this your direct, personal experience?
Check out the double slit experiment on WP
I’m familiar with that, and the double slit eraser experiment too. But I don’t see how either necessarily relates to what you said, although you may have drawn inferences from those experiments. That’s basically the first question I had – inferences or personal observation? Either way would be interesting to hear.
Its just to back up the point that observation itself changes reality. It is not that reality is left untouch and we can calmly observe it while it remains unaffected. We are in a sort of entangled state with reality.
Apparently, science has proven what you say here.
Sorry I can’t be more responsive just now as we are in Greece sailing 🙂
Okay, no problem. Sail away! 🙂
Maybe you could make this subject into a blog post.
Reality = Observed + Filter + Observer
Reality = Unknown + Filter + Observer (UFO)
😀 lol 😛
LOL!
Geir: “No. A observes B. And as a result B changes its properties. Properties of C and D may also change (if C and D are in an entangled state with B)”
.
How does A know that B changes its properties? What is his reference point?
Aee my answer to marildi. Also read up on double slit experiment and delayed-choice experiment (until recently it was a thought experiment – but last year or so it was proven as real).
Geir: “Particle A is in a certain state (e.g. A state of undecided wave/particle dualty). The state is altered by the fact of observation alone.”
.
As I understand, the above is the prior observation (let’s say O1), and let’s say the later observation is that it is a particle (let’s say O2).
Let’s say the observer A sees O2. If he is comparing O2 to O1, then he must have observed O1 also. Am I right?
Some ideas:
There are transverse and longitudinal waves. When you flip a rope, the wave that travels over it is transverse. When you play with a slinky, the wave that travels through it is longitudinal. The ripples on the surface of water in a pool are of transverse nature. But the sound waves that travel through water or air are of longitudinal nature.
Thus, a transverse wave seems to be a “surface” phenomenon, whereas, longitudinal wave seems to be a “volume” phenomenon.
If electromagnetic waves are transverse in nature then are they traveling at the interface of two very different media? Well, we have electrical and magnetic fields associated with this phenomenon. So, an electromagnetic wave may somehow travel in a medium that easily separates into an electric and a magnetic field.
The electromagnetic waves are to some degree discrete in nature even at very low frequencies. Let’s call such a discrete wave packet of some arbitrarily number of wavelengths a photon. In that case, a photon will be very long and snakelike at low frequencies, but it will get shorter and more compact as the wavelengths become shorter at higher frequencies.
At the level of electrons, the frequency within the “photon” is high enough to display mass properties due to its compactness. The electron appears like a particle. But it is still spread over some distance to display appreciable wavelike properties.
At the level of proton, however, the frequency within the “photon” is extremely high to make it appear more like a particle than a wave. Its “spread” is very small. At the level of neutron, I believe that the “photon” becomes still more compact such that the charge property gets converted to mass property completely.
The electron may look like a particle when looked upon as a “whole” phenomenon. But when one is looking at the electron “partially”, it may appear like a wave.
But the act of looking changes it’s behaviour as registered objectively.
Please see my question above in the comment:
https://isene.me/2014/06/16/your-life/#comment-72844
One would simply see what one sees. He would not be aware that what he is observing has changed from some previous state because that would imply that he had observed the previous state also.
True. But it is part of the overall picture that reality changes with observation.
How does the overall picture come about? Does it come from reasoning instead of from observation?
Well, in any case, observation is intrinsically linked to creation – and this is proven through observation.
Observation = creation of change?
>
I would lean towards that at the moment.
When one observes, the filter becomes operational and what is there to be observed gets modified.
http://vinaire.me/2014/06/11/a-model-of-reality/
The process of observation involves perceiving the patterns and then knowing what is there by giving meaning to those patterns.
Adding meaning to patterns is what occurs during observation..
http://vinaire.me/2014/03/06/khtk-postulates-for-metaphysics-part-1/#comment-24275
.
Geir Wrote:
“But instead of giving away your key to your thoughts, emotions – your life… training and exercise will eventually get you there – taking control of your own thoughts, emotions – your life.”
What exercises would you give a 13 year old girl who is about to be kidnapped and held hostage against her will with all her friends?
MY ANSWER: A Simplified RPG, Morse Code and Tonglen.
Do you have anything else other than “mindfulness?”
For some peoples of this world such advice could be worth passing on to children IMHO.
http://www.newsweek.com/us-reduces-nigeria-surveillance-flights-seeking-abducted-girls-256482
What training would you recommend for the kidnappers?
Wow. That’s a toughie Vin. So many layers of fundamentalism. I got nothin.
Hmmm…
Kidnappers are also part of the situation that includes the kidnapped. The whole situation would have to resolved to get a lasting solution.
________________________________
Yeah, but my point is about “How do you deal with forced confinement and abuse in real time?”
Your point seems more big picture. Mine is all about the nitty gritty here and now of forced abuse.
For us sitting in America this is a theoretical puzzle. We can look at it from different levels. To me, going for partial solutions only leads to the continuation of the problems, and more problems, to which there is no end.
It is different for those on the ground. They are trying to resolve it with the resources they have. But we are not there on the ground. We have time to discuss it. Don’t you think?
________________________________
I take from a couple to several opportunities per week to discuss things like man’s search for meaning, ideologies, and experience — “what is it” with my kids. My point in doing so is to get them familiar with the gap between “what is going on” around them in comparison to “how they experience” what is going on around them. I feel this is giving some fruit in the form of the ability to recognize and to create mental constructs at will. I hope this is useful to them.
“What training would you recommend for the kidnappers?”
Context? Like in what direction?
You are missing the point friend.
The girls in Nigeria are an example of the current manifestation of this problem. The point I am addressing is “What could one teach them (and others like them) ahead of time to survive the best they could and maintain an experience of optimal free will for that situation?”
How can one keep an experience of abundant choice always at hand when one is a prisoner of conscience?
Remember the imaginary-soccar-ball-friend “Wilson” from the movie “Castaway?” Wilson saved Tom Hanks life in that movie. Personally, I think Wilsons saves more people than he gets credit for.
I recall the testimony of a man who used to play 18 holes of golf everyday in his head while in a Vietnamese POW camp.
Another prison tale of the imagination is a man who had ONE book and read only a small segment a day filling in vast details to create rich worlds of his imagination.
He knew every inch of Ahab’s famous ship known as the Pequad and could even smell the salt sea air in Melvill’s Moby Dick.
So Vin, what do you teach them BEFORE they are captured? Remember, it can’t LOOK like you are prepping them for hell. It has to be fun. A game. They are KIDS.
What would I suggest as a name for such a game?
“HyperStory”
Yeah, that sounds catchy.
Okay, enough of blog-comment dopamine. I better leave before I have to go to “Comment Writer Rehab.”
Peace.
Katageek, since I seem to have more time than you on my hand, I shall prefer to be contemplating on the problem of the universe first. :).
http://vinaire.me/2014/03/06/khtk-postulates-for-metaphysics-part-1/
Good luck with that one!
DOH! I posted AGAIN. Better call my sponsor…
I am always here for you!
Right you are, since contemplation on the universe is different that the universal problem katageek wanted to explore. That problem need confrontation and solution I dont think you have either. so you have brushed off the topic once more and run under the umbrella of none-confront.
I am sure, Elizabeth, that you’ll be able to help Katageek out. 🙂
no… not me, I would not attempt to add that topic. I am doing the something as you, now my age I do what it pleases me, earlier I handled that kind of crap…I had no choice than 🙂 I let every one to do their own battles, that is what they are for: they are lessons, to learn from our own creations-experiences! 🙂 it is a lovely day in Paradise 🙂 and I love it! stop by you old goat and have coffee with me!
So you are saying the same thing that I said… or, almost the same.
Does that mean you are critical of yourself too? Do you just like being judgmental? Sounds like that is fun!
Geee V… you have not figured me out for your self in 3 years? bad bad judger! if we want to gain different realities, and i do and because of that I have learned what I know is meaningless, has no value, it is illusion a mirage of my own making and now if you say different that is your illusion.:) You see old pussy cat, in 41 years on the Path what I have found so far no matter what I believed in was a lie so you think I take self here seriously? I am not making the same mistakes again as I have on the track!
V… every day for all these years I have attacked the considerations I known with the same vigor: I knew they were wrong and wanted to know what made them so very wrong. Not critical???? hell , I wonder if that not is than what?
There is NOTHING to figure out about Elizabeth. The universe just flows grumbling and laughing. It is good to poke it now and then.
By the way, with diligence I have worked out the following definitions: (1) Self is a belief system capable of dynamic projection.
(2) A belief system is knowledge that makes useful sense out of reality.
(3) Reality is the knowledge perceived through the filter of self-awareness.
(4) Knowledge is always relative and never absolute.
(5) Truth is the degree of consistency and coherency in the reality perceived. Not that was a whole day worth of meditation. Katageek’s problem is not my cup of tea either.
________________________________
🙂 LOL..:) Right on every point what ever it means to you that is your illusions and what I read into it while reading it that understanding is my illusion. Meditation this life was not on my Path and I dont do the Zen Shuffle, but I am great with the Auditing Waltz… 🙂
I keep forgetting to tell you that our house is on the corner of Vinaire and Laval St.. so how could I forget you? 🙂
I plan to vist Vancouver in October.
🙂 looking forward to ruffle your hair! and will I have the pleasure to be introduced to your wife? 604 492 -3239
Sure!
________________________________
You are a brave man to have both of us at the same dinner table! But on the other hand you might never come west because you could kill over reading one of my devastatingly evaluating-invalidating- pointing-out that your knowledge is big fat 0… hehehe…
V… keep it in mind that in october could be raining in Vancouver, could be raining in Vancouver, could be raining in Vancouver 🙂 get my drift? We have more rain here on the Lower Mainland than in Seattle.. But it is not bad now.. we only had 15 days of rain in june ! Hell, so far no summer weather but today was sunny.. but who know what tomorrow will bring…too close to the Pacific.
Awareness by its very nature is relative and not absolute.
Awareness is known to arise, change and disappear. It may be likened to a disturbance that arises, changes and disappears. We may assume some ground state, which when disturbed gives rise to awareness.
Some philosophies consider this ground state to be self, which to them is the ability to postulate and perceive. But the ability to postulate and perceive is visible only as part of awareness. In other words, such abilities are produced only when the ground state is disturbed.
The ground state maybe considered absolute. But it shall forever be unknowable and shall remain only theoretical because there is no awareness to go with it. It may be considered “potential” but that is simply another word for unknowable.
The ‘actual’ may be looked upon as manifestation of the ‘potential’, but no one-to-one correspondence between them can ever be established. Any correspondence stated shall just be an assumption. The actual shall always be relative to where it arose from, and one cannot know where it arose from.
Thus, awareness shall always be relative and never absolute.
.
The reason that Gier is having hard time understanding the concept of unknowable is because he is assuming one-to-one correspondence between actual and potential as a fact.
And as usual, your assumption is wrong.
And your saying so proves it, Ha!
and you saying proves what? you believe you can read minds? you can duplicate realities of others what they believe in, how they see-understand their own universe, their own creation? If the answer is yes, than you are the only human on this planet who had that gift.
When you assume something about me, I believe the chances that my view is correct is in my favor. Even if that might hurt your ego.
I have no ego. Haha!
Vinaire; Of the people commenting here, you seem to have the biggest ego of all.
And as usual, your assumption is wrong. 🙂
And I am totally open to the possibility that I could be very wrong in my observation. But so far, you are protesting the subject of “ego” so much that it seems like self-suggestion of sorts. Or like Nixon’s “I am not a crook!”
I think that you are very wrong in your observation.
Well, there are a few readers of my blog that have independently come to me with similar observations – like “That Vinaire guy seems so full of himself”. They could of course also be very wrong. But maybe, just maybe that could perhaps be a clue to amend the way you come across here?
They all may have the same problem as you do. Agreement doesn’t equate to truth.
Of course not. But maybe it could be a relevant tip for you?
Or, maybe for you.
That a few people have said that you display a big ego or seem to be full of yourself… is that a tip for me? How so? If you could be more precise, I may benefit from the tip.
I am eager to change and evolve – often in many directions at once. I search and I change. For better or for worse. I always try to change for the better – but sometimes i fail and then I try my best to correct the mistake. I question my ideas and views – especially in face of new evidence. I tend to rely more on observation than speculation. When something bothers me, I tend to treat it as a training session. Pain and opposition, fear and discomfort help me evolve. And so I am open to all kinds of relevant tips for improvement. Not that I always follow another’s advice, maybe I disregard it, let it linger until the time is right or until I am up to it, or maybe it lingers forever. It’s all fluid and life is a constant change, an interesting adventure. So if you have a relevant tip, please tell. If it is good, it may help me evolve.
The problem is that you do not follow the discussion policy.
If you scroll up, you will see that you started this sub-thread by venting your assumption about something you think that I have misunderstood. And so you invited a discussion that could lead to helping us both improve. I think that is cool. Are you OK with following through with it?
(need to get some sleep before I can carry on with this myself, though 🙂 )
Sure! if you follow the discussion policy and not get obsessed with ego (either yours or mine, or anybody else’s). 🙂
Yes. Get some good sleep. I shall be going to bed soon too.
your post is true, but only in your universe….. otherwise forget it.
I like putting attention on the positive rather than the negative.
“I like putting attention on the positive rather than the negative.”
+1. It seems to do the most good where we live. In the frame of reference where we live.
One thing that we could all apply to improve any discussion would be a rule to understand one another’s comments before attempting to correct them. Replies to comments (that we disagree with) might begin with something like, “Yes, I see how you can think that.” Not rotely of course, but you get the idea. A little empathy for the effort that another goes to express themself is worth at least a little bit, isn’t it?
I’ve never met Chris face to face (I hope to someday) but I get the impression he is the rare person who treats people online with the same courtesy he treats people in person.
Thanks Chris.
Yes, he does.
Here is the current status of beginning KHTK postulates, which covers both Hinduism and Scientology. These postulates are still evolving.
KHTK Postulate M-1: Awareness is a disturbance of some ground state.
Awareness is known to arise, change and disappear. It may be likened to a disturbance that arises, changes and disappears. We may assume some ground state, which when disturbed gives rise to awareness.
.
KHTK Postulate M-2: The ground state itself cannot be known.
The ground state is the undisturbed state. Therefore there is no awareness in this state. The ground state shall forever remain unknown because one can never be aware of non-awareness. When one is being aware, there is always awareness.
.
KHTK Postulate M-3: Awareness is not absolute, but is relative to the ground state.
The ground state acts as the reference point for awareness. However, the ground state being “absence of awareness,” shall never appear in awareness.
Any awareness, therefore, is relative to the ground state. No awareness is absolute.
.
KHTK Postulate M-4: “Self,” when referred to as ground state, is unknowable.
Some philosophies refer to this ground state as “Self.” Since this ground state is not manifested in awareness, this “Self” shall be unknowable.
.
KHTK Postulate M-5: Static as the ability to postulate and to perceive is not absolute.
Scientology postulates an absolute “Static” that has the ability to postulate and to perceive. The static is essentially a precisely defined potential. However, anything that is defined, even as a potential, shall be relative to the ground state of “no awareness, or no definition.”
.
BTW: None of you have any ideas on what you would teach a school girl months before she gets taken away into a hell on earth. None of you have ANY ideas on tools you could give her that she would understand and apply to preserve her brain, maintain a sense of free will and minimize the damage of forced confinement.
Vinaire with all his KHTK volumes told me he doesn’t have enough time on his hands and wants to go ponder the Universe.
Geir and Marildi went with “Mindfulness” – a notion I find difficult for a 12 year old couldn’t even begin to understand.
Thanks for your answers.
I didn’t reply with “mindfulness”.
I would do as the OP says. Really simple for a 10 year old to grasp. I know – as I am the father of three (a 10-year old among them).
No you didn’t.
But the video Marildi posted (and you agreed with) does. Admittedly, I summed up his notions as “mindfulness” and it is an over-simplification.
Because a twelve year old is NOT going to get Frankl.
It is all too heady for a kid and all her friends who are kidnapped. Even your article.
Why?
“Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face.” – Mike Tyson
What TOOLS would you suggest? I went with Morse Code, A Prison RPG for kids, Tonglen and I’ll add sign language, parlor games and games that teach kids to lie.
I would suggest the simple, very simple 4 points in the OP. Less tools. More attitude.
Got it. Thanks.
I was really asking your opinion and now I know.
Hope you enjoyed Greece.
It was awesome 😀
I suggest “So What?” over “Fuck it!” When it comes to kids. For two reasons:
1. “So what?” can trump any “That’s What.”
and …
2. It’s not bastardizing sex, the coolest thing in life!
EXAMPLE FROM HISTORY:
GENGHIS KHAN: “I’ve conquered your people and slaughtered them.
TRIBAL LEADER: “Yeah, so what?”
GENGHIS KHAN: “SO WHAT? SO … WHAT? … I’ve conquered your people and killed them all but the finest women. Here is your wife. Watch as I, Genghis Khan rape and impregnate her at the height of her fertility as you watch. And then I will kill you in front of her THAT’S WHAT!”
TRIBAL LEADER: “Yeah, so WHAT? It’s been done before. Nothing new here.”
*****
CONCLUSION: There is no “That’s what” that cannot be trumped by a “So what?” And by saying “Fuck it” to Genghis Khan, you are submitting to him cuz “fuck it” was what he was going to do.
Remember, 1 in every 200 people is descended from Genghis Khan.
But … So what?
Very, very cool.
So, these girls got kidnapped. So what?
I’ll contemplate on the structure of the universe. 🙂
Vin, you are creating and selling a DHARMA.
One that has no place for hells it seems. Nor a preparation for them.
Dharmas are a dime a dozen. I filter them with one criteria: “If it don’t work in a hell,or help manage a hell that is to come, it is POINTLESS.”
V……I join you on that since to the present posting I can’t add simply because I am not intellectual enough to improve anything on ‘’fuck it’’ and ‘’so what’’ and these two considerations in my reality are indication of attitude and by having such outlook is indication that those who have that are not in the mode looking for different solutions.
My philosophy is that force should be used to prevent immediate harm only and not as a long term strategy of revenge and getting even.
The long term strategy should focus on education in terms of removing social conditioning so that people can think for themselves..
V… The first part was for me and I got it.. the getting even was to give you the taste of your medicine you so freely spooned out and that was making wrong. Now you said you dont have EGO now if you would not have that than you would not be still hanging on me beating your reality into dust.. V…”The long term strategy should focus on education in terms of removing social conditioning so that people can think for themselves..”” 🙂 right you are on this because using the expressions which is the topic of these above post will never point toward that.. gives attitude but not education for betterment of ones condition. Have a lovely day, I am out in the garden since we have sunny day after so many dark rainy days. We had no spring and so far no summer weather.
You may want to try and understand the concepts first
I have…. that is the reason I cant anything intelligent… and that is your reality and this is mine.
PS; which I consider to be intelligent…..
I wonder if those who will fallow in your foot steps will understand those concepts as you do: being unbias? teach, try to make a10 year old or a 17 that concept. be none bias to incoming heavy daily stimulation, to not to be affected takes training, great deal of it. because stimulation on this planet is very real to every occupants.
..a concept may work as a ‘seed’….the closer to the truth of
our being, the better….i find unbiased as such…
while i find it true what you are writing about heavy daily stimulation, one can nevertheless use concepts like the above
as one can never know if this is not that concept another needs
to hear in that moment….any concept can ‘turn on the/some light’
any time….i have experienced its truth many times….
I was waiting for your comment because I new you would be standing up for gear as you always do, very predictable.. and very well Marianne, that is your reality it is fine with me But tell that to the kid a ten year old who comes home with bloody nose, or to the man who just seen his wife fucking his best friend, or to a man who just lost his job or his legs, or just been told that he has 2 months to live because the cancer is wide spread and this man has 3 kids! seed planting is after the fact is a bit too late.
Elizabeth; Have you successfully coached people who are severely traumatized or suicidal?
yes I have….
What exactly did you do?
I am a well trained auditor.. not only as solo auditor and by auditing allowing other to be able confront I have seen what auditing can do, achieve. And I know the Tech works and improvement is not needed.
I should have added “” with great susses”
I would like to correct my self: the susses was not mine but theirs… They have successfully detached them self from the incidents, they have the memory but not the anguish and the pain and that memory will fade. I wont take credit, I served, that is all.
So you effectively coached them to letting go of the incident, to go “so what?” to those incidents…
so what? will never ever erase on incident, and uttering the so what? will never ever give a new realization on that incident and the so what? will never ever give new start in life as those cognitions have done for those people.
You are missing the point. The End Up with going “So what?”.
you have it that way.. I have it my way… if I am missing a point so do you.
Can you please explain my point back to me?
please if you dont mind waiting a bit till I find it, I have lost it, got to be dementia!
“. . . seed planting is after the fact is a bit too late.”
Yes, and that’s why I spend time on encouraging my children thinking their own thoughts for themselves, learning to understand that they are creating the experience they experience out of the raging universe around them. It take time and practice, but my kids are at least on a par with myself when it comes to controlling their own thoughts. We practice dreaming what we want to dream when asleep and practice walking away from nightmares when they are out of control. I have two purposes for doing this: 1. So they can more easily enjoy the life they find themselves living; and 2. In the event of hard to very hard times, they can more easily enjoy the life they find themselves living. I should have put this on that Katageek thread. or not.
your children will love you for ever… and will never say when you will be in need or want in the future SO WHAT? let the old bastard just fade away..good for all of you.
Thanks Elizabeth. I have my hopes about that of course but no expectations. We may be making too much out of Geir and Katageek’s very blunt version of, “This too shall pass.” Whatever lets a person release their fixation and anxiety on things they cannot control whether the past or impossible forces in the present seems pretty good for peace of mind.
So far we haven’t discussed the right balance of “so what?” compared to “fierce and unyielding fighting until one wins.” I don’t want to muddy up what is trying to be communicated but this seems to be a scale of responses to hard circumstances. It is a big subject let me offer up some KG type food for thought and context: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-QQsFyCEAw
geeee my dear I am not fighting with any one… in fact I could not care less who though what and who is not doing whatever. fighting is a useless activity and in fact 99% of posting including in this. this is my reality of course. Me posting is a totally valueless crap and I know it, but it can be entertaining reading some of the posts. 🙂
I am retired I have tooooo much time in my universe 🙂 by all means butt in.
You seem to be picking a fight whenever you can. Maybe it’s time to just let it go, say “fuck it”. I mean, so what?
go for it.. I agree, waste of time. have a lovely evening!
See? It works 😀
Now this is odd? I am picking the fight whenever I can? Now that remark is so good that I just cant let it pass by. Geir, why having different reality means to you that it is picking on you, or others? Why do you believe that means it is a FIGHT? Why cant it only mean that it is different? Not being the same? Not on the same page? Not agreeing? Different reality simply means different beliefs that is all. My fighting day have been over some years back… I like to challenge not only self but others and see what answers they come up.. Your blog would be very boring if there would be only agreements on your posts. Spice in communication are the different views of the same topic.
Chris, I was born in 39, and the war just started, I have seen lot of distraction.
Been thinking…. by teaching your children to think for them self is one of the greatest gift the parent can give. Also by learning they not only will find for self the solutions but instead ”giving help” to others they will help others to find their own solutions to their own problems and that is uplifting to give man back his ability to fend for self.
That is my hope.
and thank god not every one of them is on idiot!
katageek …..”. It’s not bastardizing sex, the coolest thing in life! “”‘
sex as the coolest thing in life:
There are immense amount of pleasures the Universe offers beside copulating.
I know–I know, you meant well.. but sex is far from the coolest thingy on this planet..
You seem to have missed out on some really good sex.
Well, what do you know, it was you who were lurking in my bedroom, I always wondered who that was! Or was it you who have ridden this body to multiple orgasm? by the way my dear how you measure what is good sex and what is bas sex? What yard stick you use beside your own to come to conclusion as such? Long as one is into believing that the act of sex is the most pleasurable activity one can have than that person is still has lot of experiencing to do in life. 🙂 you walked into this one! I could teach you a thing or two what good sex means, and that is not starting out with sex,.
You are bordering on the whacky with this one. It was you who equated sex with mere copulating. And thus it seems you have not had the best. That’s all.
it seems the lousiest lovers believe that they are the best, because out of the many I have had those who were good never ever needed to be told that he was good, he just new he was because the results he has gotten.
Yard stick might be an exaggeration.
Speak for yourself.
turkey! 🙂 I meant by that we all believe that we are the best so if we are the best than it is impassible that some one can be good as we are. by the way I have no desire to look into any ones jokey thingy and see an image holography noodle..
LOL, ok!
Hera are some revisions:
KHTK Postulate M-4: In Eastern philosophies, the ultimate Self is the same concept as the ground state of awareness.
The idea of self is relative throughout the spectrum of life. The absolute Self in Hinduism is “arrived at” by the process of “neti, neti” (not this, not that). This is the same “reality” as the ground state of awareness.
.
.
KHTK Postulate M-5: Any defined potential is also relative to the ground state.
The God of Abrahamic religions is defined as the active cause of the world. Thus, God is defined as a certain potential from which this world arose. Here God is defined in terms of this world. Such definition is relative to the ground state.
Scientology postulates an “absolute Static” that has the ability to postulate and to perceive. The static is essentially a precisely defined potential. However, anything that is defined, even as a potential, shall be relative to the ground state because the ground state has no definition.
Wow. How will that help people in work camps Vin?
Apply the “So what?” formula.
The theory of relativity will not help the people in the work camps either.
You have a specific anxiety. Others have different interests.
.
So katageek how the ”so what? formula will work on that camp? care to answer that?
I was commenting on Geir’s dharma not my dharma. I asked his opinion and he gave it. I gave him mine and he liked it.
But “so what?” is really a declaration that no matter how big a circle of “that’s what” is, one can always point to the infinity around it and expand it until the “that’s what” is a dot.
For a labor camp I would go with memory palace training; an Amar-esque Roll Playing Game for prison life I am currently calling “Hyperstory” (it will be different than Amar but still use one six sided die); Tonglen Practice (including memorizing the Lojong Proverbs); Morse Code and Sign language.
All this could be taught to kids (or anyone else) in less than a month.
The RPG could sim their old life and keep the connected to life outside the hell world. It can be done alone or solo.
fantastic.
It is RHETORICAL QUESTION.