From Clear to Clearly Nuts
Kevin Brady
For instance, the method of dianetics is quite simple, with about ten steps.
None of them require any particular belief system (other than that the steps
will work, on the part of the "auditor", and that something good might come
of it, on the part of the "preclear"), nor do they infer or imply the
existence of aliens, or any other wacky beliefs. However, once a session
begins, you will have no way of knowing what the content of a given incident
a person recounts will be, or what lies beneath it in the chain. If you
re-read Dianetics, you'll find a lot of talk about "lie-factories", and
other generators of illusions and delusory memories, or confabulations. Many
auditors were incompletely trained, and it served the Church of Scientology
and Hubbard himself for people to believe wacky ideas, sometimes, and even
to inculcate people with them.
When content becomes part of method, then you have blurred the line, and no
longer have soundness in your "tech". For instance, if you tell people a
story, and then ask them if they've ever had anything like that happen to
them, or infer that such a thing DID happen to them, then the "power of
suggestion" comes into play, and the possibility of "False Memory Syndrome"
becomes a danger. This was capitalized on by Hubbard (who was a hypnotist
prior to the explosion of Dianetics into the public awareness in 1950),
although he may not fully have been aware of how he was fucking people up
(including himself). He must have known, as time went by, though, how much
he was hurting people, and this is what probably drove him mad, leaving him
looking like a vampire, and screaming about the body thetans that were
destroying him or coming for him, or whatever it was. Hubbard crossed many
lines that a "good" man would not. He crossed the "tech" line frequently,
when it suited him. In Dianetics, this line was crossed when he assumed
that "basic" was birth, or attempted abortion, etc. There, he's proffering a
suggestion, rather than simply discovering what actually has happened to the
'preclear'. Interrogators are familiar with this. In fact, people can, in a
relatively short period of intense pressure/pain/stress, be convinced that
things have happened to them, or that they have witnessed things that they
in fact have not. If your survival, or escape from intense pain, depends on
you "remembering" that you did something horrible, and confessing to it,
then most people "find" that memory, and confess to it, if they can. Memory
and fantasy are tricky things to keep separate, particularly the further
removed from the original moment in time that the incident is purported to
have occurred.
I believe that Scientology's obsession with "whole track" and "aliens" or
"body thetans" comes from a failure to properly understand False Memory
Syndrome. Dianetics, applied improperly or incompletely, can result in a
person ascribing to very strange beliefs. If something doesn't feel right to
you, it probably isn't, when dealing with this stuff. If you stumble across
a memory, and it seems "wrong", or to conflict with the story you recall of
your life, then there are a few different possibilities. One is that the
memory you've recovered is the real memory, and other experience was
incorrectly confabulated to suppress this memory. Another is that the
recovered memory is false, a flight of fancy, whatever. Another is that the
recovered memory is a clue to something true, poking out of it's suppressed
location in a way that, stripped of full recollection, cannot be properly
interpreted. It's a tricky business, but practically speaking, the thing to
do is to go over the incident again, and see if the content is changing. If
so, continue the process. In the end, if the process is continued without
suggestion and without preconceived notions, falsehoods will be seen as
that, oddnesses will become better understood, and sometimes remarkable
clarity of a memory that had been suppressed will be recovered. Outside of
the Church, where people are expecting (auto-suggestion) "whole track"
recollection of sci-fi experiences or Godlike states, I've not found that
people have such memories or problems.
I find that most people, if you address them with dianetics, plain and
simple, benefit tremendously by it, and the complexities later introduced
were necessary to build a cult, rather than to help people.
However, if you want something REALLY simple, that grew out of Dianetics,
and avoids the pitfalls of false memory and odd beliefs, check out something
called UCP at http://net-prophet.net/ucp/
You could do this with zero training, and just an interested friend, and no
complexity to it at all.
As to the business about Thetans, consider that Hubbard's worldview was
shaped by science fiction and membership in occult lodges such as the Ordo
Templi Orientis. He was a channeler of spirits in LA before Scientology took
off. He had a big bag of tricks. The concept of the thetan is very similar
to the concept of "Atman", although Hubbard laced it with scientific
SOUNDING terminology and claimed it was completely new. (Truthiness!)
I don't believe we are immortal spiritual beings, but I do believe that
consciousness has many properties which haven't been fully understood, and
which may effect the physical universe in unexpected ways. Examples are the
"placebo effect", and the effect of intentions on random number generators,
or other quantum level phenomena.
My personal opinion is that our nervous systems are biological equivalents
of virtual reality generators, and that our consciousness is a dweller
within that environment. I think it develops when the body confronts
perceptual stimuli that force decisions. Our sense of identity, I think,
gradually evolves as "the one who decided", and gets more and more coherent
as we mature, until it becomes a full fledged sense of self sometime around
six or seven in most kids. I think this "self" could be portable into other
virtual reality environments, once the coding of the one it's presently
enmeshed within is fully understood, which may well still be many years
away: the brain is far from understood. You might want to look at a book
called "Humanizing Madness: Psychiatry and the Cognitive Neurosciences"
which advances this thesis, and describes current psychology and psychiatry
as pre-paradigmatic proto-sciences, rather than mature sciences. This is
immediately observable by the profusion of theories concerning the mind and
both mental health and mental illness. According to Thomas Kuhn and Karl
Popper, when there are a profusion of theories, none of them are fully
right, but all of them may have contributing planks towards a paradigm which
ultimately is more elegant and simple than any of it's forerunners, and
makes all of them seem like alchemy by comparison. The guy who wrote that
book, McLaren, is a psychiatrist, himself, and is very frustrated at the
present state of "science" with regard to study of the mind. The DSM IV is a
travesty, nothing more than a nosology of symptoms without any central
theory, which is pretty damning of psychiatry in general. However, when all
you have is a hammer, all you're likely to use are nails, unless you're
busting heads.
I'm quite aware that there are a number of very intelligent, good, and very
helpful psychiatrists, and that pharmaceuticals can improve quality of life
as well as grant a reprieve such that psychotherapy can be more effective,
and doesn't have to be a lifetime pursuit, but there are others who are in
it for the money, or who allow themselves to take the benefits with the push
of product. I have no idea what the percentages are, but human nature being
what it is (we are, after all, the most aggressive primates ever, and the
most xenocidal species ever known to us), I'd imagine that the rate is quite
high. It's not just my imagination, as in 1995, after separation from my
wife of six years due to meddling from the Church and already troubled
waters, I was not feeling so hot about losing my family and my work, and my
friends, and having such a heavy story hanging around me, and I sought help
for depression, and I'm glad I did: my situation was acute, I knew it, but
I couldn't tolerate it, and anti-depressants kept me alive and restored my
function. Since then, I've applied freezone scientology to some extent, and
now metapsychology, and no longer rely on antidepressants (they were always
intended [by me] to be a temporary solution). I don't hold psychiatric
medicine in contempt: it's a "best effort", and it's what we've got when
things have gone beyond a certain point where talking about it won't help,
or we're not ready yet to talk. You can take a blow that feels killing,
emotionally, as most of you probably have at some point or another, if
you've lived.
So, don't let my apparent disdain for psychiatry be interpreted as anything
other than impatience, and sometimes revulsion at research practices with
primates and other sentient animals of neurologists and other medical
specialties. It might be necessary for scientific advance, but it's
abhorrent, and if such methods could be avoided while spending more time and
money in something that might be more indirect but more humane, I'd be all
for it.
I get upset a little bit when it is considered scientific, because I don't
think treating clusters of symptoms with medicines is scientific, when those
symptoms are subjectively reported and an analysis for "correct level" of a
given neurotransmitter, or "within normal parameters" of fMRI scan for a
given condition is not done (because correct level is not known, nor are the
defining parameters of fMRI activity in the brain know for quantitative
measurement of existence of precisely defined conditions in the brain
chemistry for any psychiatric diagnosis: instead we have subjectively
reported conditions and incompletely understood medications (in terms of the
effect of long-term interference with brain chemistry, whose relationship to
our moods and tendencies is tangential, although influential, IMO), and
often no accompaniment with any attempt at psychological integration of what
has occurred, if their condition was brought on by some overwhelming
environmental stressor (broken strongly-bonded relationships, experience of
terror, exposure to strong psychedelics, experiencing combat or witnessing
combat zones without possibility of retreat, etc.), which can be a critical
component to a person recovering a balanced view of their life.
I don't claim psychology methods are a science, either, although they are
based on scientific research of intuitively understood common human
experiences, moreso now than during the days of psychoanalysis. While
talk-therapies are only helpful with helping a person focus their will and
abreactively re-experience a cognitive flood of imagery connected to what
may have been a disabling experience, I believe both of these to be
extremely valuable, and more broadly applicable than is at first obvious, as
they can benefit even people who haven't suffered such extreme stress, but
have still suffered losses, or other common human experiences that are
difficult to tolerate, or even just unwanted: sometimes just BITCHING
helps.
I sure have.
--
Kevin G. Brady
(415) 341-0022,
gomo...@hotmail.com
http://www.myspace.com/clear_objectives
Homer Wilson Smith
You are a meatball. Never been out of your body?
Consciousness = chemistry bubbling away at 98.6
Total overwhelm.
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
ho...@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Kevin Brady
news:Pine.LNX.4.62.07...@adore2.lightlink.com...
>
> You are a meatball.
Thank you.
> Never been out of your body?
Neither has anyone else.
> Consciousness = chemistry bubbling away at 98.6
No, consciousness is a virtual machine operating in that chemistry.
> Total overwhelm.
Your concept of my state is exactly that.
I am not overwhelmed. I'm pretty happy, and doing the best I have my entire
life. I don't know why you'd want to cast it the way you have, but I
suggest you look at the purpose served by it.
Heidrun Beer
>> Never been out of your body?
>
>Neither has anyone else.
Oh, this is really funny, Kevin.
Are you telling me you never read even one book about
out of body experiences (OBE)? Not even the very first book
by Robert Monroe, that went around the world like
a shock wave?
Never read Raymond Moody's collection of near death
experiences (NDE), or any of the individual NDE books that
are selling by the millions?
Come on, please convince me that you know at least the
basic developments in the area.
Heidrun Beer
Workgroup for Fundamental Spiritual Research and Mental Training
Kevin Brady
news:mpv1l35jdtn73vbmd...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 21:04:15 -0800, "Kevin Brady" <gomo...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> Never been out of your body?
>>
>>Neither has anyone else.
>
>
> Oh, this is really funny, Kevin.
>
> Are you telling me you never read even one book about
> out of body experiences (OBE)? Not even the very first book
> by Robert Monroe, that went around the world like
> a shock wave?
I've read a lot of books, Heidrun. I read the Lord of the Rings, and tons
of other fantasy stories about people surviving death, teleporting, causing
effects at a distance, etc. Yep, lots of books. I've never seen any
evidence, though.
> Never read Raymond Moody's collection of near death
> experiences (NDE), or any of the individual NDE books that
> are selling by the millions?
I haven't read Moody's collection, but subjective reports won't do the
trick. The person would have to demonstrate the ability in a manner that
wouldn't leave any doubt. I'm not a person who doubts evidence, but I do
doubt reports. I've had friends who dropped acid and thought they were in
different dimensions. Perhaps they were, but there was no evidence of that.
BTW, the Lord of the Rings movies sold millions of tickets. Lots of
wizards, magic, etc. However, of course, it's a fantasy. Doesn't mean it
couldn't have happened, just no evidence that it DID happen, except as an
illusion on a screen.
> Come on, please convince me that you know at least the
> basic developments in the area.
A book is not a development. A subjective report is not a development.
If I tell you that I can levitate objects all around my apartment, why would
you believe that?
I'm all for it, if it does develop. Nothing would make me happier than
evidence to show that I am going to live forever, that I have plenty of time
to accomplish my goals, that it will be possible for me to share my
innermost experiences with people who I value greatly. I am interested in
working to make all of these sorts of things happen. I just haven't seen
evidence of any such things.
I have seen evidence of people discovering the roots of their problems,
changing the habits that developed around those problems, and the decisions
underlying them (frequently), and living much more meaningful lives because
they aren't scripted unconsciously any more (relatively).
I understand that this means many people who hold different views than me
will consider me "lower" on some sort of spiritual awareness heirarchy, and
therefore not seek my services or partnership. I'm willing to run this
risk. There's plenty of value to be had in application of the tech without
ascribing things to it which haven't been proven, or holding out hopes to
people which cannot be delivered. That's my take.
I share my views with people in open forums, like this, not because I expect
them to necessarily agree with me, but because I believe this sort of
sharing leads us towards greater communion with each other. It's more
important to me that a person's tech be logically consistent and effective
than that their views match mine. I respect you, Heidrun, as a long-term,
genuine and beautiful person in the tech arena, regardless of the fact that
our fundamental "spiritual" outlooks are very different. I know I can count
on you to tell the truth as you see it, to help when you can, and to act
with integrity. This doesn't mean I'm willing to compromise my own reality
simply to pretend to agreement.
I hope you're well, and that your work continues to unfold in a direction
that keeps you interested. I haven't been getting in session enough,
recently, but I'm lucky, and will be attending Mary Freeman's Ethics
Programme in January with a group of very effective tech terminals, and I
can't wait. I have some clients, and they are making some progress, and
their lives are improving, as my own is. I hope you are getting in session,
some, yourself, because I know a lot of tech terminals in the FZ end up
taking care of others without getting their own needs met. Don't fall into
the trap that got Hubbard! We all need to get in session some (and not just
solo!).
Heidrun Beer
>"Heidrun Beer" <hB...@sgmt.at> wrote in message
>news:mpv1l35jdtn73vbmd...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 21:04:15 -0800, "Kevin Brady" <gomo...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> Never been out of your body?
>>>
>>>Neither has anyone else.
>>
>>
>> Oh, this is really funny, Kevin.
>>
>> Are you telling me you never read even one book about
>> out of body experiences (OBE)? Not even the very first book
>> by Robert Monroe, that went around the world like
>> a shock wave?
>
>I've read a lot of books, Heidrun. I read the Lord of the Rings, and tons
>of other fantasy stories about people surviving death, teleporting, causing
>effects at a distance, etc. Yep, lots of books. I've never seen any
>evidence, though.
Then please do me a favour and focus on the book that started
the whole wave, "Journeys Out of the Body",
http://www.amazon.com/Journeys-Out-Body-Robert-Monroe/dp/0285627538/ref=pd_bbs_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1196532910&sr=8-3
If you don't want to accuse him of outright lies, he is living
(until he died) proof that OBE's are real.
He also spawned a whole generation of new authors in the area
who gained their OBE skills by going through his training.
Other famous names would be William Buhlman and Robert Bruce,
or the afterlife retrieval specialist Bruce Moen who helps
to retrieve souls who are stuck between levels after death.
They teach it in workshops. There is a Yahoo newsgroup,
OBE_Newsletter, where OBE travellers share their experiences.
Calling them all liars would really be too cheap, Kevin!
>I hope you're well, and that your work continues to unfold
>in a direction that keeps you interested.
I hope so too. I still have a life to rebuild, but at least
I have the discipline to write down [nearly] all notes that
"download" over night.
>I haven't been getting in session enough,
>recently, but I'm lucky, and will be attending Mary Freeman's Ethics
>Programme in January with a group of very effective tech terminals, and I
>can't wait.
I have heard good things about her. It's a good idea!
> I have some clients, and they are making some progress,
>and their lives are improving, as my own is. I hope you
>are getting in session, some, yourself, because I know a lot
>of tech terminals in the FZ end up taking care of others without
>getting their own needs met. Don't fall into the trap that got
>Hubbard! We all need to get in session some (and not just
>solo!).
Right now I feel more like doing things instead of reflecting
what I have done in session. After so many hundred or thousand
hours you too may run out of stuff to run :-)
But doing never ends, and doing with an eye on optimum
survival (greatest good for the greatest number), as you are
planning, is the best way to go about it.
Keep well,
Mickel
Hi Ya
here is a technique in order to experience out of body phenomenon. Bleeding
easy.
First of all put out of your mind any ideas, dogma (Whatever) concerning
what might happen, new unit of time sort of thing.
Next, be aware that it all might be a load of crap, no guarantees here mate!
Just an experiment.
Wot you do is this: Choose a room, lets say the kitchen, you go around it,
touching things, feeling em' looking at them, feeling weight, seeing size,
shape, all that sort of stuff, use all yer senses. You got to spend some
time at this, half an hour, an hour, no rush.
Then you go and sit down or lie down in a quiet place and go over what you
have just done in the kitchen in your mind, you need to be relaxed.
In your mind, see, feel, use as many senses as you can reviewing the kitchen
experience..
Ok, that is seeing pictures in the mind, however, after a while something
rather unusual happens, but I can't tell you that, you got to experience for
yourselves.
or not,
I don't care, I just write this stuff up for some reason.
See Ya
Mike
transceiver
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 23:00:18 -0800, "Kevin Brady" <gomorr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >"Heidrun Beer" <hB...@sgmt.at> wrote in message
> >news:mpv1l35jdtn73vbmd...@4ax.com...
> >> wrote:
>
> >>>> Never been out of your body?
>
> >>>Neither has anyone else.
>
> >> Oh, this is really funny, Kevin.
>
> >> Are you telling me you never read even one book about
> >> out of body experiences (OBE)? Not even the very first book
> >> by Robert Monroe, that went around the world like
> >> a shock wave?
>
> >I've read a lot of books, Heidrun. I read the Lord of the Rings, and tons
> >of other fantasy stories about people surviving death, teleporting, causing
> >effects at a distance, etc. Yep, lots of books. I've never seen any
> >evidence, though.
>
> Then please do me a favour and focus on the book that started
I'll put that book on my queue, but don't know when that will get
read, as there are quite literally fifteen others on my shelf in front
of it.
> If you don't want to accuse him of outright lies, he is living
> (until he died) proof that OBE's are real.
Not believing someone else doesn't mean you think they're lying. In
this case, I think that people are misinterpreting their experiences
to fit a desired view. However, I am open to the possibility I'm
wrong on that. Physics makes it quite clear that time is not linear,
except that our senses view it that way. Many possible universes, and
each one is a frozen moment: the apparency of time is like the old
trick with a series of images moving so fast that you are tricked into
seeing the images on the pages as one continuous, moving image, rather
than a bunch of different images in transition. However, I haven't
seen any explanation of why we see time this way.
Thus, to me the "past life" situation isn't real, any more than the
present time-"stream" is real. Both are apparencies selected from all
possible universes. In this way, we are all seeing an illusion, which
doesn't, to me, mean the same thing as lying.
>
> He also spawned a whole generation of new authors in the area
> who gained their OBE skills by going through his training.
>
> Other famous names would be William Buhlman and Robert Bruce,
> or the afterlife retrieval specialist Bruce Moen who helps
> to retrieve souls who are stuck between levels after death.
>
> They teach it in workshops. There is a Yahoo newsgroup,
> OBE_Newsletter, where OBE travellers share their experiences.
> Calling them all liars would really be too cheap, Kevin!
I didn't call anyone a liar, regarding this.
CB Willis
>> Never been out of your body?
Kevin Brady <gomo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Neither has anyone else.
On what basis do you say this?
Carol
transceiver
> >> Never been out of your body?
> >Neither has anyone else.
>
> On what basis do you say this?
>
> Carol
Because there isn't any evidence that anyone ever has.
CB Willis
Homer Wilson Smith
Meatballs are unfathomably shallow.
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
ho...@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
On Sat, 1 Dec 2007, <hB...@sgmt.at> wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 21:04:15 -0800, "Kevin Brady" <gomo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Never been out of your body?
>>
>> Neither has anyone else.
>
>
> Oh, this is really funny, Kevin.
>
> Are you telling me you never read even one book about
> out of body experiences (OBE)? Not even the very first book
> by Robert Monroe, that went around the world like
> a shock wave?
>
> Never read Raymond Moody's collection of near death
> experiences (NDE), or any of the individual NDE books that
> are selling by the millions?
>
> Come on, please convince me that you know at least the
> basic developments in the area.
>
>
>
>
>
Kevin Brady
news:4751...@news2.lightlink.com...
Replicable experiments with objective criteria. It's not me making the
extraordinary claim, and so I'm not prepared to spend a lot of time
designing a scientific protocol that would cover it. You can feel free. In
the meantime, I'll stick within the realm of the accepted world around me.
It's not that such things are impossible, it's that they aren't the goal of
clearing, and aren't important yardsticks measuring success of clearing.
Thus, they are secondary benefits, if they exist, and I'd rather stick to
the primary goal of clearing: handling charge.
Mickel
the grass growing in my garden "green", completely pointless, I mean,
probably 99.999999999 percent of people on Planet Earth could be called
"meatballs".
Sounds a bit elitist.
Elitism is the belief or attitude that those individuals who are considered
members of the elite - a select group of people with outstanding personal
abilities, intellect, wealth, specialized training or experience, or other
distinctive attributes - are those whose views on a matter are to be taken
the most seriously or carry the most weight; whose views and/or actions are
most likely to be constructive to society as a whole; or whose extraordinary
skills, abilities or wisdom render them especially fit to govern.
Alternatively, the term elitism may be used to describe a situation in which
power is concentrated in the hands of the elite.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Within the pillars of the mind a being moves self rightiously, these pillars
are called beliefs.
These self imposed beliefs (you took em' on, you didn't have to) constrict a
Being into well worn paths that never end, solid as a rock, look at Muslims,
Christians, solidified into the timestream, never ever looking beyond their
precious, treasured beliefs.
They all have the TRUTH don't they? bleedin' right mate, everyone else is
wrong but "I" am right!
The cosmic dance, the cosmic joke, fucking Beautiful, Ha
Windmills of your mind
Round
Like a circle in a spiral
Like a wheel within a wheel
Never ending or beginning
On an ever-spinning reel
Like a snowball down a mountain
Or a carnival balloon
Like a carousel thats turning
Running rings around the moon
Like a clock whose hands are sweeping
Past the minutes of its face
And the world is like an apple
Whirling silently in space
Like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind
Like a tunnel that you follow
To a tunnel of its own
Down a hollow to a cavern
Where the sun has never shone
Like a door that keeps revolving
In a half-forgotten dream
Or the ripples from a pebble
Someone tosses in a stream
Like a clock whose hands are sweeping
Past the minutes of its face
And the world is like an apple
Whirling silently in space
Like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind
Keys that jingle in your pocket
Words that jangle in your head
Why did summer go so quickly?
Was it something that you said?
Lovers walk along a shore
And leave their footprints in the sand
Is the sound of distant drumming
Just the fingers of your hand?
Pictures hanging in a hallway
And the fragment of a song
Half-remembered names and faces
But to whom do they belong?
When you knew that it was over
You were suddenly aware
That the autumn leaves were turning
To the colour of her hair
Like a circle in a spiral
Like a wheel within a wheel
Never ending or beginning
On an ever-spinning reel
As the images unwind
Like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind
See Ya
Mike
P.S. Thanks for the News Group.
"Homer Wilson Smith" <ho...@lightlink.com> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.62.07...@adore2.lightlink.com...
>
CB Willis
>>>> >> Never been out of your body?
>>>> Kevin Brady <gomorr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >Neither has anyone else.
>>>>
>>>> On what basis do you say this?
>>>>
>>>> Carol
>>
>>>Because there isn't any evidence that anyone ever has.
>>
>>
>> What could count as evidence, on your view?
>>
>> Carol
>Replicable experiments with objective criteria. It's not me making the
>extraordinary claim, and so I'm not prepared to spend a lot of time
>designing a scientific protocol that would cover it. You can feel free. In
>the meantime, I'll stick within the realm of the accepted world around me.
>It's not that such things are impossible, it's that they aren't the goal of
>clearing, and aren't important yardsticks measuring success of clearing.
>Thus, they are secondary benefits, if they exist, and I'd rather stick to
>the primary goal of clearing: handling charge.
I don't see "out of body" as it's usually understood in metaphysics to be a goal,
as in an OT-type goal.
Actually by some definitions is an extremely common and everyday phenomenon.
Not really an extraordinary claim, just one not talked much about - probably
because it's so common.
An identity (not a role a la Scn and Kn) as spirit is a disidentification with/as
body, an externalization to use a scn term, and a de facto "out of body".
Your standards above are physical world standards. You're attempting to apply
physical world standards to spirituality and personhood, which use different
criteria, different rules.
This is an apples and oranges problem, trying to apply the standards of oranges to
apples. Another way to put this is "category mistake", like the square root of
blue. Apples don't have rinds for example and never will. Saying an apple is
inadequate or false because it doesn't have a good rind would be considered
nonsense. We can try in vain to determine the square root of blue, but the task is
ill conceived due to category mistake to begin with.
Likewise ill-conceived due to category mistake is trying to apply physical world
criteria to the spiritual or non-physical, which often uses revelation and/or
self-evidence.
Pain is a homely example of self-evidence - the person is the ultimate authority on
their pain. A classic example. Even though the pain can be about something
physical, the pain itself is non-physical, it's an experience. Degree of pain may
not correspond to anything about the body you can measure. Patients are commonly
asked to put their pain on a scale of 0-10. You've done this yourself, the degree
of severity of pain is self-evident to you, and people tend to take your word for
it, don't need to conduct double blind studies nor collect a bunch of people to
agree about it in order to validate your experience of degree of severity of pain.
Reality by agreement (science) can be taken too far. Everyone could believe
something that is false and so limited as to be unworkable in the end. Even in
science, disruptive technologies are the ones that radically disagree with everyone
else but do it in such a way as to revolutionize the culture, and end up getting
others to agree (or not). What we used to call "paradigm shifts", "scientific
revolutions", or "sea change." So I would not over-rely on social agreement
as a criterion of truth.
As Homer says, you place yer bets and takes yer chances.
I agree, and say to regroup and refine as needed along the way.
An apple with no rind is still a great apple, and can rival an orange any day of the
week.
Food for thought!
Carol
CB Willis
>I don't think I could ever call anyone a meatball, it would be like calling
>the grass growing in my garden "green", completely pointless, I mean,
>probably 99.999999999 percent of people on Planet Earth could be called
>"meatballs".
>Sounds a bit elitist.
A meatball is one who identifies himself AS A BODY, period end of story.
Ultimate identity is a BODY.
Nearly everyone agrees they have a body, but I don't think 99.99999999999%
agree they ARE a body and that's it to them as a person or being.
Multiple choice:
Who are you as a being?
- I am a body.
- I am a spirit.
- I am a mind, an intellect.
- I am a bunch of emotions.
- I am nothing.
- I am a spirit, and have a body.
what other possibilities are there?
What % of people do you think would assent to the various options above?
Carol
Mickel
Thanks Carol
Would you say identification with the body begins with accidents, pain we
experience when we are very young, such things as nappy rash when a baby or
falling over as a toddler.
I can remember quite clearly before I was 5 years old the number of times I
fell over and took the skin off my knee or knees, I can even feel the sting
of it now and I can see that my attention from looking outwards is drawn
into the body, then we have pubity, that sure draws the attention in,
balanced perhaps by looking out at the opposit sex.
I am not surprised that for the majority of people that by the time they are
adults they are completely identified with the body.
And I havn't got to the mind stuff yet.
Thanks
Mike
Mickel
Sorry Carol I missed your questions, my Daughter was leaving at the time so
I got distracted, I can only say this at the moment " I got a big confusion
somewhere".
Best
Mike
Mickel
If we are just a brain ( not saying that is what you are saying), How come
we can see holographic pictures all around us, not inside the head?
Ask anyone to describe a scene from the past and ask them where various
objects are in this picture and watch them point outwards or all about them,
What the hell are they pointing at "out there" it's just chemicals in the
brain isn't it? or so "Meatballs" would say :))))
Just an interesting observation from myself, when I look at a picture it is
not in my head, it is all about me, holographic.
Just wanted to type that.
Mike
"Kevin Brady" <gomo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:474fc5ee$1...@news2.lightlink.com...
transceiver
>
> - Show quoted text -
All well and good, except that the claim is made that an OT is cause
of matter, energy, time and life, which are physical properties. If
this is the case, then the ability to alter matter, energy time or
space in a manner which showed a deviation from otherwise expected
course would demonstrate the truth of the claim. Absent this, it's a
false claim. As I said, I don't consider this to mean that clearing
is any less valuable, since the OT Abilities claim was always a
sideshow, having only tangential bearing on what clearing is.
transceiver
transceiver
> I just remembered something I wanted to say Kevin.
>
> If we are just a brain ( not saying that is what you are saying), How come
> we can see holographic pictures all around us, not inside the head?
>
> Ask anyone to describe a scene from the past and ask them where various
> objects are in this picture and watch them point outwards or all about them,
> What the hell are they pointing at "out there" it's just chemicals in the
> brain isn't it? or so "Meatballs" would say :))))
No, it's not chemicals in the brain. No more than a program is
chemicals in a computer. Just not the case.
> Just an interesting observation from myself, when I look at a picture it is
> not in my head, it is all about me, holographic.
That's what your senses report.
> Just wanted to type that.
> Mike
okay.
McDermot
If it involves a havingness loss I don't like, why is it more real than
the havingness I prefer.
CB Willis
>All well and good, except that the claim is made that an OT is cause
>of matter, energy, time and life, which are physical properties.
This is an scn goal and claim. It is not my claim in the same way
as they intend it. There may be some overlap.
>If this is the case, then the ability to alter matter, energy time or
>space in a manner which showed a deviation from otherwise expected
>course would demonstrate the truth of the claim. Absent this, it's a
>false claim. As I said, I don't consider this to mean that clearing
>is any less valuable, since the OT Abilities claim was always a
>sideshow, having only tangential bearing on what clearing is.
Permeation or pervading matter, energy, time, and space with spiritual consciousness
and spiritual substance would be more along the lines of my claim, and this would
not necessarily be visible as a physical phenomenon, might be but not necessarily.
Rather, it would likely require spiritual consciousness to stand witness in turn.
That's beyond the realm of science as we're used to thinking of it, nevertheless
very intelligible.
Carol
CB Willis
[cbwillis:]
>> Who are you as a being?
>>
>> - I am a body.
>> - I am a spirit.
>> - I am a mind, an intellect.
>> - I am a bunch of emotions.
>> - I am nothing.
>> - I am a spirit, and have a body.
>>
>> what other possibilities are there?
>>
>> What % of people do you think would assent to the various options above?
>>
>> Carol
transceiver <gomo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>- a process.
Cool!
C
Kevin Brady
news:4753...@news2.lightlink.com...
Because reality is reality, regardless of what we prefer. It's not a
fantasy-land. While your own private universe may be different, the
physical universe, and any universe we share, are governed by rules, not
simply wand-waving.
Kevin Brady
Yes, well, I'll take your word for it. It's not my area of interest. I'm
not sure why it would benefit a person to do this, if it had no tangible
effect in their immediate life. That's all I'm concerned with: what makes
people happy, well and able in thier immediate life.
McDermot
hum...@gmail.com
> "CB Willis" <cbwil...@adore2.lightlink.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
My experience:
Was being run on OPRO by DUP. Back and forth a couple dozen times.
Suddenly I got interested in the way the book seemed to come up at
"me". Then how I was perceiving the borders of the colors on the book
being used. Auditor soon realized that something was different with
me (bless him for that) so he practically had to drag me to the post
session attest because I was so interested in the PT environment I was
just kind of wandering around. I recall the examiner fiddling trying
to get the needle on the dial and then kind of astonishingly
realizing it was a floating TA and then simply acknowledging me. As I
got up I walked from the second story of the Miami Org down 2 flights
of stairs. As I descended the stairs the space in the stairway was so
vividly real, like space had never been before. As I hit the bottom
step of the stairway and entered the first floor room the space, my
space, rushed out instantaneously and literally filled the entire
room. I was feeling the surfaces of furniture in the room tactily from
a distance. Nothing looked quantitatively different, but being
intensely in PT everything was being experienced qualitatively
different....as if I had never seen or experienced it before. It was
an incredible experience.
Interest and admiration are watch words for having such experiences.
The PT environment is so incredibly diverse and rife with potential
experiences. The trick is to just start looking at it and push through
any "thinking" that intrudes until you brighten up. I once sat and
simply spotted things there that were different from each other,
making a hash mark for each one and didn't stop until I'd reached like
2500, and this was in a smallish 6x8 foot room. There were probably
thousands more but the cognition on the diversity of the environment
was enlightening. Never a reason to be bored again!
As an aside tech recommendation the CCR titled Hand Space Mimicry is
probably one of the quickest ways to short circuit "thinkingness" and
experience PT space there is. Probably should be part of a daily
routine.
Kevin Brady
news:da40d91f-c374-49da...@s36g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
I think this is great, and I've had similar experiences. My point isn't
that such experiences cannot happen, it's that they aren't the goal of
clearing, and aren't systematically obtained. While many people have
reported such experiences, they aren't routine, and usually aren't stable.
However, I do agree that making interest (instead of being interesting) is
key. It's key to properly "doing" the TRs, and it's key to everything else
in our lives. A wonderful discipline, known in more modern parlance as
"mindfulness". Simply putting your attention fully on your environment.
--
Kevin G. Brady
(415) 341-0022,
gomo...@hotmail.com
http://www.myspace.com/clear_objectives
Homer Wilson Smith
>>>Because there isn't any evidence that anyone ever has.
Real scientific.
Not only unfathomably shallow but stupid too.
> It's not that such things are impossible, it's that they aren't the goal of
> clearing,
Wrong. Exteriorization from all created conditions of existence
is the goal of clearing.
> and aren't important yardsticks measuring success of clearing.
Wrong.
> Thus, they are secondary benefits, if they exist, and I'd rather stick to
> the primary goal of clearing: handling charge.
If you have no charge on being a body, you are lying through
your teeth.
Homer
>
>
--
Homer Wilson Smith
> Would you say identification with the body begins with accidents, pain we
> experience when we are very young, such things as nappy rash when a baby or
> falling over as a toddler.
>
Any full OT can permeate anything, including bodies in pain.
The being must go through the 'no sympathy, sympathy, propiation'
cycle towards bodies to get to a point where he *DECIDES* to BECOME a
body to take care of it.
Every accident and hurt he suffers just reenforces his postulate
that he is no good at taking care of bodies and thus no good as a being,
and therefore must try harder and harder to be perfect strong and nice
etc.
Homer
Kevin Brady
news:4754...@news2.lightlink.com...
> Kevin Brady <gomo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>Because there isn't any evidence that anyone ever has.
>
> Real scientific.
>
> Not only unfathomably shallow but stupid too.
Really? Show the evidence.
>> It's not that such things are impossible, it's that they aren't the goal
>> of
>> clearing,
>
> Wrong. Exteriorization from all created conditions of existence
> is the goal of clearing.
I did not have sexual relations with that woman (Ms. Lewinski). Redefine
away, Homer. That's not the goal of clearing. You are talking about
release.
>> and aren't important yardsticks measuring success of clearing.
>
> Wrong.
Wrong.
>> Thus, they are secondary benefits, if they exist, and I'd rather stick to
>> the primary goal of clearing: handling charge.
>
> If you have no charge on being a body, you are lying through
> your teeth.
That's your position. I think your position is based on false data: same
problem as Hubbard had: you have charge on something, and assume it's the
basis of everyone else's case too.
Homer Wilson Smith
> All well and good, except that the claim is made that an OT is cause
> of matter, energy, time and life, which are physical properties. If
Physical universe does not exist, its a dream, just like
when we are asleep. Your dream brain in your sleep dreams
is just a dream, so is your waking brain your waking dreams.
> this is the case, then the ability to alter matter, energy time or
> space in a manner which showed a deviation from otherwise expected
> course would demonstrate the truth of the claim.
Yes it would, but would also destroy various conservation
laws that this universe depends upon, including speed of light
of causation etc. Everyone would wake up instantly if this
started to happen and the game would be ruined.
Absent this, it's a
> false claim.
Uh are you stupid or what?
Absent evidence = false claim?
Arguing this is in fact dharma treason, and you demonstrate your
own inability to think clearly or honestly in these matters, a trait
common to meatballs.
As I said, I don't consider this to mean that clearing
> is any less valuable, since the OT Abilities claim was always a
> sideshow, having only tangential bearing on what clearing is.
Wrong.
The purpose of clearing is to erase postulates, that is what is
being cleared. Postulates are postulates of limitation.
All limitations are created limitations.
The world is a dream, wake up.
Kevin Brady
news:4754...@news2.lightlink.com...
>> All well and good, except that the claim is made that an OT is cause
>> of matter, energy, time and life, which are physical properties. If
>
> Physical universe does not exist, its a dream, just like
> when we are asleep. Your dream brain in your sleep dreams
> is just a dream, so is your waking brain your waking dreams.
That is a possibility. I wouldn't call it a dream, but I would agree that
it isn't what it appears to "be".
>
>> this is the case, then the ability to alter matter, energy time or
>> space in a manner which showed a deviation from otherwise expected
>> course would demonstrate the truth of the claim.
>
> Yes it would, but would also destroy various conservation
> laws that this universe depends upon, including speed of light
> of causation etc. Everyone would wake up instantly if this
> started to happen and the game would be ruined.
This would be acceptable to those of us who don't see it as a game. If one
of the conditions of the game is that we can't be conscious, I'm not down.
> Absent this, it's a
>> false claim.
>
> Uh are you stupid or what?
Do you fuck your mom, or what?
> Absent evidence = false claim?
Absent evidence, the claim is nothing more than a claim. Could be false,
could be true, but at any rate, it's not necessary for clearing to occur.
> Arguing this is in fact dharma treason, and you demonstrate your
> own inability to think clearly or honestly in these matters, a trait
> common to meatballs.
Dharma treason? Don't you have to have agreed to something before you can
betray it?
> As I said, I don't consider this to mean that clearing
>> is any less valuable, since the OT Abilities claim was always a
>> sideshow, having only tangential bearing on what clearing is.
>
> Wrong.
Wrong.
> The purpose of clearing is to erase postulates, that is what is
> being cleared. Postulates are postulates of limitation.
That's not all there is to clearing, but it is the sign that clearing has
been successful.
> All limitations are created limitations.
Good postulate.
> The world is a dream, wake up.
That would be Dharma Treason.
Mickel
"Homer Wilson Smith" <ho...@adore2.lightlink.com> wrote in message
news:4754...@news2.lightlink.com...
>> Would you say identification with the body begins with accidents, pain we
>> experience when we are very young, such things as nappy rash when a baby
>> or
>> falling over as a toddler.
>>
> No, this is a victim explanation for the matter.
I cannot believe I didn't see that, no gold star from teacher today, I bet.
"Permeate is a key word for me, came up in various ways the last couple of
days.
See Ya
Mike
Mickel
"Homer Wilson Smith" <ho...@adore2.lightlink.com> wrote in message
news:4754...@news2.lightlink.com...
Dear Homer
This is probably a completely stupid question (sometimes you have to make
allowances for the stupid)
But how can a dreamed character get up a dreamed Scientology bridge?
See Ya
Mike
transceiver
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
This is the problem with tautologies, Mike. Solutions in terms of
themselves with no application to "real world" are essentially
solipsism.
Mickel
"transceiver" <gomo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:063d4bcc-ae11-4f6e...@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Is that the same as saying "Keeping my feet on the ground", I may
investigate many types of different realities but I always make sure I keep
in contact with plenty of MEST, this reality we are in, I have seen and you
have what can happen to people when someone loses their grip on reality.
Quantum Physics is all very interesting but if I were to walk into a lampost
accidentily it bloody hurts, Ha
Thanks
Mike
Heidrun Beer
>This is probably a completely stupid question (sometimes you have to make
>allowances for the stupid)
>
>But how can a dreamed character get up a dreamed Scientology bridge?
Consensus reality - the same dream co-created by many.
In the afterlife, all belief systems have such a co-created
and therefore solid (not responsive to an individual's thought)
environment.
Heidrun Beer
Workgroup for Fundamental Spiritual Research and Mental Training
CB Willis
>Because reality is reality, regardless of what we prefer. It's not a
>fantasy-land. While your own private universe may be different, the
>physical universe, and any universe we share, are governed by rules, not
>simply wand-waving.
Every invention was once a fantastic idea only about what the inventor would prefer,
with little or no agreement as to its feasability.
Carol
Kevin Brady
news:4754...@news2.lightlink.com...
And many of them never came into being, because they weren't feasible. Some
did, because they were.
CB Willis
Kevin Brady <gomo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Absent evidence, the claim is nothing more than a claim. Could be false,
>could be true, but at any rate, it's not necessary for clearing to occur.
I take it you're using the term "evidence" here in the formal, contemporary sense
of scientific evidence.
Clearing is partly about clearing away falsehoods, and about being able to
recognize and generate truths.
There is more to life and truth than scientific evidence, like math, logic,
aesthetics, value and quality, religious experience and revelation even.
P.S. Do you need a machine or needle to tell you you're clear?
Oh I forgot, so self. Nobody home. Irresponsibility.
Who goes clear?
And who pays $$ for it as needed?
Carol
CB Willis
>Is that the same as saying "Keeping my feet on the ground", I may
>investigate many types of different realities but I always make sure I keep
>in contact with plenty of MEST, this reality we are in, I have seen and you
>have what can happen to people when someone loses their grip on reality.
>Quantum Physics is all very interesting but if I were to walk into a lampost
>accidentily it bloody hurts, Ha
>Thanks
>Mike
Walking into a lampost would keep you in contact with plenty of MEST, yeah that
would do it.
Carol
CB Willis
>"CB Willis" <cbwi...@adore2.lightlink.com> wrote in message
>news:4754...@news2.lightlink.com...
>> Kevin Brady <gomo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Because reality is reality, regardless of what we prefer. It's not a
>>>fantasy-land. While your own private universe may be different, the
>>>physical universe, and any universe we share, are governed by rules, not
>>>simply wand-waving.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Every invention was once a fantastic idea only about what the inventor
>> would prefer,
>> with little or no agreement as to its feasability.
>>
>>
>> Carol
>And many of them never came into being, because they weren't feasible. Some
>did, because they were.
My intention here was to show that a good invention is a fantasy that became a
reality.
The line between fantasy and reality is not always cut and dried,
nor is fantasy always a derogatory term to be contrasted with reality.
Carol
Kevin Brady
news:4754...@news2.lightlink.com...
>
>
>
> Kevin Brady <gomo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>Absent evidence, the claim is nothing more than a claim. Could be false,
>>could be true, but at any rate, it's not necessary for clearing to occur.
>
>
> I take it you're using the term "evidence" here in the formal,
> contemporary sense
> of scientific evidence.
As I understand it, yes.
> Clearing is partly about clearing away falsehoods, and about being able to
> recognize and generate truths.
>
> There is more to life and truth than scientific evidence, like math,
> logic,
> aesthetics, value and quality, religious experience and revelation even.
Agreed, although I see religious experience and revelation as emotional or
cognitive experienes, rather than spiritual or divine experiences. In the
end, it's just words describing an experience which can only be understood
by each individual. Each individual will have their own words and context
to frame it.
> P.S. Do you need a machine or needle to tell you you're clear?
No. But they are helpful aids to perception, just as any other indicator
is.
> Oh I forgot, so self. Nobody home. Irresponsibility.
Yes, that's your understanding of what I said.
> Who goes clear?
No one.
Clearing is a process. A person isn't called an Anger because they became
angry. Nor is a person a Clear because they cleared something.
> And who pays $$ for it as needed?
Whoever agreed to do so.
Making light of the concept is easy. If all identity is assumed, and all
experience is fictional (if time isn't real, which I'm willing to concede,
except by consideration), then even the identity "self" falls under this
rubric. I'm not claiming that I have it all figured out. I have a
persistent sense of self as much as any other human. The hope of clearing,
however, is that that which binds us to this identity can be cleared
(charge), freeing us to be whoever, and whatever we can imagine.
CB Willis
>P.S. Do you need a machine or needle to tell you you're clear?
Yes I think this is the question here.
I say you don't need that machine "evidence", but rather it self-evident
to consciousness, and also revealed to others who may stand witness.
Carol
Kevin Brady
True. I don't consider fantasy derogatory: it's a potential reality, and
can certainly be experienced in the imagination even if it cannot be put
into practice in the physical universe. I don't deny the existence of the
imagination!
Mickel
"CB Willis" <cbwi...@adore2.lightlink.com> wrote in message
news:4754...@news2.lightlink.com...
You know Carol there was a survey done many years ago (I forget which
decade) and it asked people what they were most frightened of concerning
bodily health (or mental health),
Cancer
Heart attack
Stroke
were not at the top of the list, the most feared item was losing their
sanity.
I have over the course of my lifetime glimpsed or experienced many types of
spiritual levels or states, within the mind I have seen some pretty weired
stuff, God knows what all that crap is.
I also know for a fact that if I mention any of this to anyone I am
immediatly labeled (Summat not quite right with him) so I tend to keep me
gob shut in my normal life.
The one thing I do not want to end up as is someone like Koos, so while I do
my spiritual writing or investigation, I make sure I return to my normal
mode afterwards.
I can describe the Universe using Quantum Physics, and include consciousness
as the source (whatever) but how many people that I meet in my normal life
would understand what the hell I am talking about, well I ain't met one yet,
so I must be mixing with the wrong people or something.
On the other hand, maybe I am completely barmy as my views differ from most
other people, I am not in agreement with what they perceive as Life, the
universe and everything, I mean, does an insane person know they are insane?
or do they believe they are normal?
I like to consider these things from every angle, I like to investigate,
where did they get their data, how are they spinning it, can I see the ego.
control methods and so on, which is a major fault of mine, I should just
shut up and get on with it, but no, I can never leave things just as they
are.
Ss I think that should a person be like me with lots of spiritual ideas,
experiences, I think it is most importand to ground oneself now and again.
Mike
Mickel
"Heidrun Beer" <hB...@sgmt.at> wrote in message
news:8tl9l3dlig9c6q7ne...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 20:47:00 GMT, "Mickel" <micke...@blueyonder.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>This is probably a completely stupid question (sometimes you have to make
>>allowances for the stupid)
>>
>>But how can a dreamed character get up a dreamed Scientology bridge?
>
>
> Consensus reality - the same dream co-created by many.
What if it is a dream created by no one?
>
> In the afterlife, all belief systems have such a co-created
> and therefore solid (not responsive to an individual's thought)
> environment.
How is this information stored if according to Hubbard the mind dissolves at
death, but then he says a lighter form of the mind is taken forward.
I don't belive in reincarnation, the way a lot of people consider it today.
The word has a lot of different definitions, in ages past it never meant
coming back and living again in another body.
That does not deny spirituality in a person it's just a different viewpoint.
A person can be very spiritual without reincarnation, space opera et.al.
My personal spiritual search never included past lives, reincarnation,
earlier universes, etc, I simply wanted to know who or what I really am
beyond this name and form that I seem to occupy here given the so called
spiritual experiences I have had in my life.
All I find in my search is people arguing about this that and the other,
"Iv'e got the truth here, this is the real path" and so on ( I include
myself in all of this, I'm just as bad at times), just look at how many
belief systems there are on this planet and all the subsets, bloody
thousands of them, even within any one religion if you questioned different
people you would find they have different understandings about what they are
supposed to believe.
Well you know something Heidrun, the fact that people on this planet have so
many individual beliefs which they got or altered from other people
(whatever) speaks volumes to me.
Once trapped within a belief system, a person cannot see out of this created
universe, they have to stick to their pillar of faith, they never see
outside the box, which is what happened to me.
So what I am doing is seeing how I got trapped into a certain mindset, how
to move everything everyone else has told me and let me see my truth, not
theirs.
Best
Mike
Homer Wilson Smith
> could be true, but at any rate, it's not necessary for clearing to occur.
Thank you for admitting your dharma treason.
Guilty as charged.
Homer
Kevin Brady
Sure. If that's what I did.
> Guilty as charged.
Wow, get help, Homie. Hope you're better soon.
Homer Wilson Smith
> I also know for a fact that if I mention any of this to anyone I am
> immediatly labeled (Summat not quite right with him) so I tend to keep me
> gob shut in my normal life.
Yes if you break people's dramatizations they see the evil
that is in them, but they assign it to you. It's like seeing
the world through evil colored glasses, its on THEIR face,
but it colors their perception of you.
That makes them very dangerous because they think YOU
are dangerous.
> I can describe the Universe using Quantum Physics, and include consciousness
> as the source (whatever) but how many people that I meet in my normal life
> would understand what the hell I am talking about, well I ain't met one yet,
You met me, and I understand your point of view.
And unlike Kevin, you are full of spiritual experiences and
evidence up the wazoo, which means you ain't shallow.
> On the other hand, maybe I am completely barmy as my views differ from most
> other people, I am not in agreement with what they perceive as Life, the
> universe and everything, I mean, does an insane person know they are insane?
> or do they believe they are normal?
The insane believes the sane to be insane.
But can not recognize the possbility that he is also insane.
The sane will see the insanity in the insane, but is also
very able to see it in himself.
The insane do not wonder.
The sane do.
> Ss I think that should a person be like me with lots of spiritual ideas,
> experiences, I think it is most importand to ground oneself now and again.
That's call coming in with Sovereign intent.
Homer
>
> Mike
Homer Wilson Smith
>> Consensus reality - the same dream co-created by many.
>
> What if it is a dream created by no one?
"Who or what is responsible for your condition?"
>>
>> In the afterlife, all belief systems have such a co-created
>> and therefore solid (not responsive to an individual's thought)
>> environment.
>
> How is this information stored if according to Hubbard the mind dissolves at
> death, but then he says a lighter form of the mind is taken forward.
It is stored in the structure of consciousness itself.
Consciousness is stuff, just not dimensional space time stuff.
It has many abilities, mostly related to data storage, creation
and destruction.
> I don't belive in reincarnation, the way a lot of people consider it today.
So where were you the past hundred trillion years before
this body, and where will you be after it dies?
> A person can be very spiritual without reincarnation, space opera et.al.
Nah, spiritaul means not made of MEST. Spiritual means made
of Spirit, consciousness etc.
Some spirituality leaks over from the immortal into the mortal,
but not much. Spirituality really means divinity, and without
the divine, there is mostly carrion left over.
>
> My personal spiritual search never included past lives, reincarnation,
> earlier universes, etc, I simply wanted to know who or what I really am
> beyond this name and form that I seem to occupy here given the so called
> spiritual experiences I have had in my life.
Good, but where were you before this life? What CAUSED you to
get born?
Now there are only two possible answers to that questions.
Either you chose, in which case you existed and were aware before
you took over the body, and thus have a history of existence prior
to conception.
Or you didn't chose, something else chose for you, which leaves you
a zero responsibility for condition case.
> All I find in my search is people arguing about this that and the other,
> "Iv'e got the truth here, this is the real path" and so on ( I include
> myself in all of this, I'm just as bad at times), just look at how many
> belief systems there are on this planet and all the subsets, bloody
> thousands of them, even within any one religion if you questioned different
> people you would find they have different understandings about what they are
> supposed to believe.
Yes, and most of those beliefs are implanted.
Thus you need to stick to perfect certainties in your quest
for truth. The rest will come.
> So what I am doing is seeing how I got trapped into a certain mindset, how
> to move everything everyone else has told me and let me see my truth, not
> theirs.
So now you gotta move out of your mind set that you don't have
prior responsibility for this life.
Homer
> Best
> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Heidrun Beer
>>
>> Workgroup for Fundamental Spiritual Research and Mental Training
>>
>> http://www.sgmt.at
>>
>> http://www.RecastReality.org
>
--
Homer Wilson Smith
>>> Absent evidence, the claim is nothing more than a claim. Could be false,
>>> could be true, but at any rate, it's not necessary for clearing to occur.
>>
>> Thank you for admitting your dharma treason.
>
> Sure. If that's what I did.
Your inability to admit your deceit is telling.
Just say "Yes I am sorry, I claimed that absent evidence meant
false claim, and this is clearly wrong, don't know what got into me, but
IT WON'T HAPPEN AGAIN."
"Oh and I also admit that just because I don't have any evidence
for something doesn't mean there is or never has been nor never will be
any evidence for it, it merely means I don't have any, which may very
well be because I haven't looked hard enough, or talked to the right
people, or perhaps I am in fact lacking certain developable qualities
that might help me get the evidence I seek."
"Oh and I also admit that seeking proof of timelessness while
inside of time is probably not workable, thus proof of immortality will
never come from another being even if they themselves have it, but will
only come when I myself find my own source of being."
"Oh and I also admit that asking another to prove some OT power or
another first of all wouldn't prove anything to me because I would doubt
my own sanity shortly thereafter, but second of all would in fact
endanger the life and loved ones of the demonstrator, and is thus very
crude and rude and uncivilized of me to do so."
Homer
Kevin Brady
news:4756...@news2.lightlink.com...
>>>> Absent evidence, the claim is nothing more than a claim. Could be
>>>> false,
>>>> could be true, but at any rate, it's not necessary for clearing to
>>>> occur.
>>>
>>> Thank you for admitting your dharma treason.
>>
>> Sure. If that's what I did.
>
> Your inability to admit your deceit is telling.
>
> Just say "Yes I am sorry, I claimed that absent evidence meant
> false claim, and this is clearly wrong, don't know what got into me, but
> IT WON'T HAPPEN AGAIN."
I do admit that this was wrong logic, and boiled down to an incorrect
generalization. I don't admit that is was any sort of treason, but simply
an error. As to whether it will happen again, that is possible, if I make
such an error again.
> "Oh and I also admit that just because I don't have any evidence
> for something doesn't mean there is or never has been nor never will be
> any evidence for it, it merely means I don't have any, which may very
> well be because I haven't looked hard enough, or talked to the right
> people, or perhaps I am in fact lacking certain developable qualities
> that might help me get the evidence I seek."
Or because it doesn't exist.
> "Oh and I also admit that seeking proof of timelessness while
> inside of time is probably not workable, thus proof of immortality will
> never come from another being even if they themselves have it, but will
> only come when I myself find my own source of being."
There is a big difference between timelessness and immortality, or survival
through eternity. Additionally, the idea that one has always existed
implies that time is real, which is in doubt. Existence occurs in
timespace, and so speaking of existing outside of timespace is not the same
thing as speaking of eternal life within timespace, which implies eternal
past lives as well as future lives within timespace, which I don't believe
to be either necessary or valid. While some may have existed throughout all
time in this universe, and are simply living in human bodies now, I don't
believe that without evidence, because I find it extraordinary. However, my
belief in it is not necessary. It either is or is not true. I take this
attitude in session. When someone brings up a memory, whether it is from
this lifetime, or not, I consider it a reported experience, and I then run
it. What I'm looking for is the postulate off, not judging the reality of
the experience, along with improvement of affect and extroversion of
attention back to the present.
The only time I become unwilling to accept the reality or unreality of
another's experiences is when they expect me to operate off their data in my
life. That I will not do, as it amounts to a compromise of my own reality.
I operate off my own data and experience, and I don't expect others to
operate off it! The matrix of "accepted science" is something I'm willing
to operate within, because I think it is an interesting paradigm, and one
which acts very much like a session. Scientists study something over and
over, repeating experiments, until such time as they discover an underlying
truth, which may change the whole paradigm of accepted reality (although
this change seeps through the collective with "comm-lag"), prompting new
experiments. I've found that the "accepted science" paradigm moves slowly,
for the most part, but is on an accelerating curve, with discoveries of
underlying truths coming at an almost stupefying rate of late, much
mirroring the progress of someone receiving "auditing". At first, it's
usually slow going, lots of grind, a few insights here and there, and then
they start accelerating, until they start blowing charge on-inspection, or
even blowing whole chunks by simply spotting their similarities and
differences, and then they are suddenly just THERE, Floating TA, and free.
I don't know how long that "state" can be maintained, and I don't consider
attainment of that "state" the goal. I consider the goal being the learning
of the discipline of completing cycles of action, learning to spot charge,
and to release it on your own, such that you can be fully responsible for
your own condition in any game you are playing.
> "Oh and I also admit that asking another to prove some OT power or
> another first of all wouldn't prove anything to me because I would doubt
> my own sanity shortly thereafter, but second of all would in fact
> endanger the life and loved ones of the demonstrator, and is thus very
> crude and rude and uncivilized of me to do so."
>
> Homer
Yeah, well, I don't agree that is the case. While I might doubt my own
sanity, it wouldn't be the first time, and I came through just fine, but
applying my own self-discovered version of the locational (confusion
formula), which I discovered prior to scientology exposure, while on acid.
When having a bad time, I simply would start making contact with reality,
until such time as I would realize that the "bad time" was "just the drug",
or some other such realization, and that I would be fine, that I had been
fine all along, and that I had just been afraid of a new state of mind. As
to the danger to the person or their loved ones, perhaps that would be true
if the demonstration was something which destabilized things for people who
were more powerful and who were capable of some form of punishment, but I'm
not sure I believe that such beings exist, or that a demonstration of such
ability would necessarily require a destabilization of their game on a scale
that would matter to them.
Mickel
> Mickel <micke...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Consensus reality - the same dream co-created by many.
>>
>> What if it is a dream created by no one?
>
> "Who or what is responsible for your condition?"
I am Homer but I have got into the habit of blaming everyone else.
Duh!
>
>>>
>>> In the afterlife, all belief systems have such a co-created
>>> and therefore solid (not responsive to an individual's thought)
>>> environment.
>>
>> How is this information stored if according to Hubbard the mind dissolves
>> at
>> death, but then he says a lighter form of the mind is taken forward.
>
> It is stored in the structure of consciousness itself.
>
> Consciousness is stuff, just not dimensional space time stuff.
>
> It has many abilities, mostly related to data storage, creation
> and destruction.
Understood, no problem with that.
>
>> I don't belive in reincarnation, the way a lot of people consider it
>> today.
>
> So where were you the past hundred trillion years before
> this body, and where will you be after it dies?
I sometimes make a bold statement like the above to see what information I
can elicit from the other person, trouble is I think Heidrun is getting wise
to the way I operate, Damn!
For me it depends which way I look at it, I can look at this from a linear
time way or stand back and view it from a holographic way, in other words,
It's all here and you can tap into any part of it.
The only problem I have with the holographic view is Why cannot we tap into
the future as easily as we can the past and I can only think that has to do
with personal considerations, we all have these postulates in us, such as,
"We never know whats round the corner", " The future is unknown", postulates
like that and there are probably thousands like that.
I will tell you why I think or perceive this way.
The very first auditing session I did I put the person into a past life.
I am not going to give any personal details about the person and what I am
going to say is just a very short part of the actual incident.
In this incident the person opened a door, walked across the room and out
the other door at the opposite side of the room.
That is it! but what I would do is get the PC/Client orientated in the
incident by asking them various questions like colours, objects, body
position, all this sort of stuff.
So on the next run through I stopped the person in the middle of the room
and asked them to describe the wallpaper but the PC could not see it very
well so I asked them to go over and feel the wall and describe the pattern
to me.
After the session I thought to myself that there was something odd about
this, true enough as a person releases charge from the incident the story
can change even to something completely different to what they origionaly
told me but here within this incident which I assumed was a fixed incident,
a fixed memory from the past I was able to get them to explore that
environment, it took me a long time to get an understanding about that.
This is not just the imagination, you can find incidents even within just
this life time, things that actually happened to the person and instead of
just running a fixed memory you can explore many different things.
I can look at where I used to live before I was 5 years old, I can rise up
above the houses and see the whole area and explore different parts of the
environment, I dunno, seems to me to be a holograph and you can look into it
from different angles.
Hubbard also said something about this and I cannot remember where, but he
was talking about viewing past lives in a linear way as in death and then
shortly after rebirth in another body, I am sure he said that this is not
exactly correct but if you look at it in a non linear way you might go to
sleep for what might seem an eternity and maybe if it is a holograph next
time I appear I might find myself back in the middle ages being hung drawn
and quartered, nice thought that one, that is if I don't wake up to the
illusion.
>
>> A person can be very spiritual without reincarnation, space opera et.al.
>
> Nah, spiritaul means not made of MEST. Spiritual means made
> of Spirit, consciousness etc.
>
> Some spirituality leaks over from the immortal into the mortal,
> but not much. Spirituality really means divinity, and without
> the divine, there is mostly carrion left over.
I can see that.
>
>>
>> My personal spiritual search never included past lives, reincarnation,
>> earlier universes, etc, I simply wanted to know who or what I really am
>> beyond this name and form that I seem to occupy here given the so called
>> spiritual experiences I have had in my life.
>
> Good, but where were you before this life? What CAUSED you to
> get born?
Just for the experience maybe, I would make sure I designed it so that it
would be very difficult to see out of the mess or game I put myself in to.
I believe Hubbard said something to the effect of, If we could just throw
back the curtain, so to speak and see all that what we are doing, call it
Enlightenment, it would be end of game, you would either have to find a new
game or leave for a higher universe game where you would leave behind such
things as sex, aquiring objects, ego position and operate at a higher
aesthetic band
>
> Now there are only two possible answers to that questions.
>
> Either you chose, in which case you existed and were aware before
> you took over the body, and thus have a history of existence prior
> to conception.
>
> Or you didn't chose, something else chose for you, which leaves you
> a zero responsibility for condition case.
I would not disagree with that about zero responsibility of my case, there
are many things in my mind I don't like to confront and in life, but I don't
have a rush to get anywhere with my spiritual journey I enjoy this game, not
like the Scientology organisation rushes everyone.
My Wife was sent the latest Source magazine it's all about breaking records,
people reading 9 books in 12 days, 2,600 pages, I don't believe it, they
might have read the books, but did they evaluate the data, have they
experienced it in real life or is it all just sitting there in the mind of
no use to them.
I believe that data has to be used in conjunction with life's experiences as
you go along not just shoved into the mind and then "Look at me I read 9
books in 12 days"
throughout this magazine, flying, rocketing, burning, 21 emeter drills in
one day where before it was 7 or 9, to learn something properly takes time
and a lot of practice till you make it your own, I don't believe a person
gets it at that speed.
Bloody hell Homer, the Being sits in eternity, it ain't going nowhere, I
don't want to wreck the game too soon, then I will have to go and mock
something else up, this ok for me at the moment, no rush.
>
>> All I find in my search is people arguing about this that and the other,
>> "Iv'e got the truth here, this is the real path" and so on ( I include
>> myself in all of this, I'm just as bad at times), just look at how many
>> belief systems there are on this planet and all the subsets, bloody
>> thousands of them, even within any one religion if you questioned
>> different
>> people you would find they have different understandings about what they
>> are
>> supposed to believe.
>
> Yes, and most of those beliefs are implanted.
Yes!
>
> Thus you need to stick to perfect certainties in your quest
> for truth. The rest will come.
I know that, but the mind entity wants it all now, I WANT ENLIGHTENMENT NOW!
But as I said I don't want to wreck the game too soon, I won't be able to
come on here and throw a few insults at you if I do that :)
Ted
> Kevin Brady <gomo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Absent evidence, the claim is nothing more than a claim. Could be false,
> >>> could be true, but at any rate, it's not necessary for clearing to occur.
> >>
> >> Thank you for admitting your dharma treason.
> >
> > Sure. If that's what I did.
>
> Your inability to admit your deceit is telling.
>
An auditor who requires physical proof of exteriorization would be a
very bad auditor in my estimation.
I would agree that with such attested levels as Grade 0, ability to
cmmmunicate with anyone about anything, etc., some proof is warranted.
The EP's of the Grades are starting points for the demonstration of the
abilities gained. The EP's are not a finality in of themselves.
Proof of exteriorization is an oxymoron.
--
Ted
Mickel
> Mickel <micke...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> I also know for a fact that if I mention any of this to anyone I am
>> immediatly labeled (Summat not quite right with him) so I tend to keep me
>> gob shut in my normal life.
>
> Yes if you break people's dramatizations they see the evil
> that is in them, but they assign it to you. It's like seeing
> the world through evil colored glasses, its on THEIR face,
> but it colors their perception of you.
>
> That makes them very dangerous because they think YOU
> are dangerous.
You ain't kidding Homer, I spent 8 years in a Childrens home, they wanted to
produce a "Model Citizen", believe me, I saw the hate in their faces because
I wanted to remain "me" and not become what they wanted and they had free
use of all their tools to use on me, I didn't come out of them homes
undamaged Homer..
>
>> I can describe the Universe using Quantum Physics, and include
>> consciousness
>> as the source (whatever) but how many people that I meet in my normal
>> life
>> would understand what the hell I am talking about, well I ain't met one
>> yet,
>
> You met me, and I understand your point of view.
I am trying not to be egotistical here because as far as I am concerned this
is not about me being superior to anyone else it's just something I became
aware of when I was very young, I can't think of the exact word I need but
in a spiritual sense we are all equal or translates best as "We are all
Spiritul Beings"
>
> And unlike Kevin, you are full of spiritual experiences and
> evidence up the wazoo, which means you ain't shallow.
>
>> On the other hand, maybe I am completely barmy as my views differ from
>> most
>> other people, I am not in agreement with what they perceive as Life, the
>> universe and everything, I mean, does an insane person know they are
>> insane?
>> or do they believe they are normal?
>
> The insane believes the sane to be insane.
>
> But can not recognize the possbility that he is also insane.
>
> The sane will see the insanity in the insane, but is also
> very able to see it in himself.
>
> The insane do not wonder.
>
> The sane do.
I see that.
>
>> Ss I think that should a person be like me with lots of spiritual ideas,
>> experiences, I think it is most importand to ground oneself now and
>> again.
>
> That's call coming in with Sovereign intent.
I see, sometimes it seems to that people (including me) are on a major
inversion, inside, trying to get out when actually we are already out.
Get a few inversions like that and I am not surprised we can get in a mess.
Probably the cosmic joke I sometimes write about.
Thanks
Mike
Kevin Brady
news:1i8n4lx.1rwfjer7uxueuN%ted_c...@hotmail.com...
Roles change with circumstances. In this NG, I'm not an auditor, I'm an
observer, a writer, and sometimes a commentator on technical issues.
In session, I'm a facilitator, which is very much a parallel role to
auditor. In that role, I wouldn't want proof of anything at all, I simply
run whatever process is called for after observing the condition of the
person in front of me, and end session when end-phenomena are observed.
CB Willis
>without the divine, there is mostly carrion left over.
As in luggage, right?
Baggage, as they say in therapy.
:-)
Carol
CB Willis
>Kevin Brady <gomo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Absent evidence, the claim is nothing more than a claim. Could be false,
>>>> could be true, but at any rate, it's not necessary for clearing to occur.
>>>
>>> Thank you for admitting your dharma treason.
The spiritual being is central to clearing, on my view.
A dim shadow of clearing may happen entirely secularly, with neither facilitator nor
viewer having any spiritual awareness much less bringing this to bear on the
processing. Though it is my understanding that the viewer can and will bring his
own spirituality to the session and viewing experience. I presume the facilitator
can also. Just seems very dry to me without, like a drought in a desert.
Some things can be done, and done effectively under those conditions. Some have even
run marathons. That austerity has an aesthetic of sorts. How much can you do with
how little, sort of thing. Except that the fullness of the experience comes in with
the spirituality, and the more you bring to it, the more you'll get out of it.
There is room for that. But where that doesn't happens, seems like such a loss,
bordering on waste, to me. Still, that's a starting point for some people.
Carol
Kevin Brady
more meaningful to you. I don't deny my own perceptions, or the importance
of having full receptivity to what the viewer is reporting. A person gets
out of looking at their case what there is to be gotten out of it,
regardless of the views of the facilitator. The meaning is the same, to me.
I find insisting on terms like spirituality and divine to describe my
experience limiting, not freeing.
Proofs in the pudding. I'm having the effects I'm looking to create, and
I'm happy about that, as are the people who I have been working with. Some
of them are spiritual. Some of them are atheists. It is completely
irrelevant when the moment of realization occurs, and the person "steps
back" from the charge that was holding them and is free of it. Words fail
to describe it. You just know. That's what I call a correct indication of
charge, and then that is over. I find that happens every session I offer,
with the only exceptions being when the viewer is physically exhausted or
massively overwhelmed with present time problems. You question the value of
my work, and fail to see it is the same work, it just doesn't require
acceptance of any views other than what charge is and how it is discharged.
--
Kevin G. Brady
(415) 341-0022,
gomo...@hotmail.com
http://www.myspace.com/clear_objectives
"CB Willis" <cbwi...@adore2.lightlink.com> wrote in message
news:4757...@news2.lightlink.com...
motherswith...@hotmail.com
> "Heidrun Beer" <hB...@sgmt.at> wrote in message
>
>
> > On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 21:04:15 -0800, "Kevin Brady" <gomorr...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >>> Never been out of your body?
>
> >>Neither has anyone else.
>
> > Oh, this is really funny, Kevin.
>
> > Are you telling me you never read even one book about
> > out of body experiences (OBE)? Not even the very first book
> > by Robert Monroe, that went around the world like
> > a shock wave?
>
> I've read a lot of books, Heidrun. I read the Lord of the Rings, and tons
> of other fantasy stories about people surviving death, teleporting, causing
> effects at a distance, etc. Yep, lots of books. I've never seen any
> evidence, though.
>
> > Never read Raymond Moody's collection of near death
> > experiences (NDE), or any of the individual NDE books that
> > are selling by the millions?
>
> I haven't read Moody's collection, but subjective reports won't do the
> trick. The person would have to demonstrate the ability in a manner that
> wouldn't leave any doubt. I'm not a person who doubts evidence, but I do
> doubt reports. I've had friends who dropped acid and thought they were in
> different dimensions. Perhaps they were, but there was no evidence of that.
> BTW, the Lord of the Rings movies sold millions of tickets. Lots of
> wizards, magic, etc. However, of course, it's a fantasy. Doesn't mean it
> couldn't have happened, just no evidence that it DID happen, except as an
> illusion on a screen.
>
> > Come on, please convince me that you know at least the
> > basic developments in the area.
>
> A book is not a development. A subjective report is not a development.
>
> If I tell you that I can levitate objects all around my apartment, why would
> you believe that?
>
> I'm all for it, if it does develop. Nothing would make me happier than
> evidence to show that I am going to live forever, that I have plenty of time
> to accomplish my goals, that it will be possible for me to share my
> innermost experiences with people who I value greatly. I am interested in
> working to make all of these sorts of things happen. I just haven't seen
> evidence of any such things.
>
> I have seen evidence of people discovering the roots of their problems,
> changing the habits that developed around those problems, and the decisions
> underlying them (frequently), and living much more meaningful lives because
> they aren't scripted unconsciously any more (relatively).
>
> I understand that this means many people who hold different views than me
> will consider me "lower" on some sort of spiritual awareness heirarchy, and
> therefore not seek my services or partnership. I'm willing to run this
> risk. There's plenty of value to be had in application of the tech without
> ascribing things to it which haven't been proven, or holding out hopes to
> people which cannot be delivered. That's my take.
>
> I share my views with people in open forums, like this, not because I expect
> them to necessarily agree with me, but because I believe this sort of
> sharing leads us towards greater communion with each other. It's more
> important to me that a person's tech be logically consistent and effective
> than that their views match mine. I respect you, Heidrun, as a long-term,
> genuine and beautiful person in the tech arena, regardless of the fact that
> our fundamental "spiritual" outlooks are very different. I know I can count
> on you to tell the truth as you see it, to help when you can, and to act
> with integrity. This doesn't mean I'm willing to compromise my own reality
> simply to pretend to agreement.
>
> I hope you're well, and that your work continues to unfold in a direction
> that keeps you interested. I haven't been getting in session enough,
> recently, but I'm lucky, and will be attending Mary Freeman's Ethics
> Programme in January with a group of very effective tech terminals, and I
> can't wait. I have some clients, and they are making some progress, and
> their lives are improving, as my own is. I hope you are getting in session,
> some, yourself, because I know a lot of tech terminals in the FZ end up
> taking care of others without getting their own needs met. Don't fall into
> the trap that got Hubbard! We all need to get in session some (and not just
> solo!).> gomorr...@hotmail.comhttp://www.myspace.com/clear_objectives
Kevin,
There are some real genuine writings there.
I am forming the view that we are in an atheistic sort of dilemma.
That thetans do not live forever - but simply want to.
There is one consciousness and it is the father of all things. the
only way for it to have any kind of functioning game is to have
players. the only way to have players is to have individuation - thus
the thetan/soul/ego theory arrives. The devil is only the thing that
says to you "hey you.......it's really all about you - you
know.........you'll live forever.....yes you will....oh yes you'll go
to heaven....yeeess..................now run along"
I have seen NO evidence of Dianetics doing any SUPER miracles.. gay
PCs are still gay....No one is really OT...no
one.........................OH I WISH ONE WAS...
I used to watch that show "in search of" as a kid....Leonard
Nimoy ....yeah...it was great.......I always want the proof....and as
time goes on it appears its all just undiscovered psychology (albiet
spiritual psychology) - as i said there must be a one great underlying
postulate here. But unless we get over this "I AM damn it" we will own
too much track to have key in on ourselves.
The other guys are not nice to you....
I mean if they were truly enlightened - I reckon they would be more
polite.
Your names appear all over this NG...I mean you guys must be going
around in circles.
Hope to here from you soon kevin
Kevin Brady
We're not going around in circles, we have differences of opinion and are
exploring their origins, working on coming to better agreement.
I've seen miraculous change in people. I've not seen people change from gay
to straight, as you use that example, but that has never been discovered to
be their goal, by me, in session. Instead, it's usually been found to be
someone else's goal for their auditing, and the idea that their being gay
was a problem turns out almost invariably to have been a "wrong indication".
Best not to bring your belief system into session, as much as possible.
--
Kevin G. Brady
(415) 341-0022,
gomo...@hotmail.com
http://www.myspace.com/clear_objectives
<motherswith...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:46edd4ed-409f-4a85...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
CB Willis
>That thetans do not live forever - but simply want to.
Translating thetans loosely here as individual spirit,
we'll find out (or not).
Carol
transceiver
Translating it as Hubbard originally did, it was the "awareness of
awareness unit"
ned
> So what I am doing is seeing how I got trapped into a certain mindset, how
> to move everything everyone else has told me and let me see my truth, not
> theirs.
> Best
> Mike
>
just words and learning (or conditioning if you like).
Our concepts are governed by words. Words with their definitions create
boundaries for our concepts which in turn create specific meaning. We bind
our selves with these words when truly we are boundless.
the kneeling fool
motherswith...@hotmail.com
Why would you audit an "awareness of awareness unit"? If you asked it
anything - it would have the unfortunate effect of coming up with an
answer (a nothingness aligning itself with and owning and taking
"responsibility" for more significance i.e time track)
On the other hand, if you do not audit an awareness of awareness unit
then I guess you won't get as-isness either.
I think there is an e.p. to auditing period. the real world is the
road out. I mean once you get "out of the bank" and able to live - i
mean Thats the EP. I have NEVER seen any case gain past that point.
Kevin Brady
news:080d84c1-936e-4c72...@b40g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
I completely agree. My own perspective is that it is likely that exiting
the bank completely requires running out any charge connected with presently
restimulated GPMs. Beyond that, life is the process. As your
responsibility level rises, and your area of influence increases, OR
decreases, reality around you changes, or your ability to make changes and
influence it does. Mastery puts you into a different level game, as does
failure. In either situation, it is likely that you'll generate more charge
as you go along, and the idea that there is permanence to any of this is
given the lie by the fact that we fell in the first place, or that we can
rise back to whence we've fallen. Throughout our lives, the discipline of
the TRs is valuable, and a good session can clean up things that we "didn't
get to", or whatever. But searching for items that aren't in restimulation,
or pushing people into things that don't follow their interest will grind or
worsen the condition of a person who allows it. We don't need to mock up
more charge for ourselves. :) There's plenty in plain view for anyone I've
ever known, if you can confront the reality which they might be withholding
for your benefit, without giving them stuff to run! And yes, sometimes,
it's just time to go live life! As tone improves, accessibility of the case
improves, and so as a person is successful in something, they are likely to
bump into more charge that previously had been inaccessible.
It's variable!
My own approach is to make sure people are working from an Admin Scale type
of approach, and to run rudiments on that Admin Scale regularly,
particularly if they are disengaged or frustrated with their career (or
don't know what their career is). Then do Life Stress Reduction (known as
Life Repair in Scientology), and then check the Grades, if there is
interest. After that, thorough TIR (analogous to Dianetics) on anything
that they have attention on (attitudes, emotions, sensations, postulates),
and then straight into handling their own GPM material, not any implant
stuff unless that comes into view handling their own goals, and then only
handling it as a corrective action, not seeking all possible implants or
implanters. At present, I'm not trained to handle the GPM area, it's my
last big hurdle, but I'll be tackling that this year. Meanwhile, I refer
people to someone I know (bastard likes his anonymity) in San Francisco who
is thoroughly so-trained.
While you may not have seen any gain from that sort of processing, I
definitely HAVE. I'm not speaking of the OT Levels. Stuff along the lines
of R6EW, or 3D Criss-Cross, a lecture I heard, I think on "The Rock" lecture
series. 3D Criss-Cross seemed overly complicated to me, but it seemed to
have the right targets, which I think is even more elegantly expressed in
R6EW, but even more clearly and without any form of bias in metapsychology's
"Unstacking". The people I know who've completed the Unstacking stuff are
extremely stably vital, happy, self-actualizing, pan-determined, fulfilled,
happy and genuine people I've ever known. They don't suffer from being
withdrawn, secretive, elitist, arrogant, defensive- it's a hell of an
experience to be in such a person's company, and extremely liberating when
you surround yourself with such people.
While I'm not a spiritually minded person, it's a little like sitting and
listening to a master sitar player just hanging around with them. Peace,
serenity, generosity... and it's natural, not manipulative, no ulterior
agenda. Most of the people who did the Unstacking section had previously
done OT levels, and say there simply is no comparison, because it's not
handling something you have no influence over, it is just completely
liberating of the self.
--
Kevin G. Brady
(415) 341-0022,
gomo...@hotmail.com
http://www.myspace.com/clear_objectives
motherswith...@hotmail.com
> <motherswithoutchild...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
is that your myspace
Kevin Brady
news:1811ade7-1b06-4a7a...@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 7, 10:31 pm, "Kevin Brady" <gomorr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
gomorr...@hotmail.comhttp://www.myspace.com/clear_objectives
>
> is that your myspace
Yep.
Mickel
"ned" <ned...@seagoon.sho> wrote in message
news:Fp46j.4348$yZ4....@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
I should know that so well Neal, All my life I have found words to be
limited, how can you possibly explain what the finger points at with words,
it's not possible.
Words like Thetan, or even Spiritual Being are so limited, I see that some
people take this and try to make something of it, size shape, weight, it
really cannot be described, not by the mind it cannot, that is something I
do know, I think we can only try to reach for it in whatever way we think we
can. Here I am indicating the Spiritual awareness which we are.
I go into the mind figure figureing, then for some reason the mind content
falls away, I have never found during those experiences that there is
anywhere to go other than where I am right now.
However I shall travel on my merry way trying to get somewhere other than
here, at least I feel better that way, just accepting things, stuff like
that what some people do is not how I manefest.
Take care.
Mike
CB Willis
This is LRH's take on philosophy of "self-consciousness" or reflexive consciousness.
Many similarities to "atman" in Hinduism/Vedanta.
See also Kant's defn of "transcendental unity of apperception".
Hegel, Schopenhauer, many philosophers had a similar notion.
Carol
CB Willis
>Why would you audit an "awareness of awareness unit"? If you asked it
>anything - it would have the unfortunate effect of coming up with an
>answer (a nothingness aligning itself with and owning and taking
>"responsibility" for more significance i.e time track)
Does sound kinda dry.
>On the other hand, if you do not audit an awareness of awareness unit
>then I guess you won't get as-isness either.
very funny in re terminology
>I think there is an e.p. to auditing period. the real world is the
>road out. I mean once you get "out of the bank" and able to live - i
>mean Thats the EP. I have NEVER seen any case gain past that point.
maintaining a state of clear while living in the real world, clearing as needed,
seems very practical.
Carol
Homer Wilson Smith
> I do admit that this was wrong logic, and boiled down to an incorrect
> generalization. I don't admit that is was any sort of treason, but simply
> an error. As to whether it will happen again, that is possible, if I make
> such an error again.
Error?
That error seems to me to be built into every attitude you have
about this subject and probably everything else you do and think about
in life.
I would get over it quick, built in logic errors are a disgrace and
make you a pariah on any group of worthy beings, and lead your life down
the garden path to ruin.
Also frankly I do not believe such behavior is an innocent error,
it is much more likely born long ago of a willful attempt to win an
argument by cheating rather than admitting that you just don't know.
Claiming that a claim is FALSE because there IS no evidence leads
one away from looking for that evidence, and thus one becomes AWOL on
that subject.
Such an error is there both scientific and spiritual sedition at
best, treason at worst.
>> "Oh and I also admit that just because I don't have any evidence
>> for something doesn't mean there is or never has been nor never will be
>> any evidence for it, it merely means I don't have any, which may very
>> well be because I haven't looked hard enough, or talked to the right
>> people, or perhaps I am in fact lacking certain developable qualities
>> that might help me get the evidence I seek."
>
> Or because it doesn't exist.
I will take that as admiting what I have asked. Thanks.
However you seem to be unable to say simply, "Yes Homer you are
right," even if you add a line to complete the thought.
You can't admit in a court of debate that you were wrong, by
continuing to assert rightness.
The court of debate wants to hear very clearly "Yes you are right, I
was wrong, it won't happen again, Sir."
>> "Oh and I also admit that seeking proof of timelessness while
>> inside of time is probably not workable, thus proof of immortality will
>> never come from another being even if they themselves have it, but will
>> only come when I myself find my own source of being."
>
> There is a big difference between timelessness and immortality, or survival
> through eternity.
Uh, you clearly have not been reading the group very carefully.
Particuarly you haven't been reading ME.
Immortality in time is hell forever.
No one here claims immortality in time.
Additionally, the idea that one has always existed
> implies that time is real, which is in doubt.
You doubt your own existence either in time or out of time?
Existence occurs in
> timespace,
No that is your very limited definition of existence and the word
is not used that way on this group.
Existence applies to anything that IS whether it is being or
becoming, either in or out of space time.
The static AllThatIs exists just as much as any in time
manifestations might exist. In fact some would claim the in time
stuff doesn't exist, but only the out of time stuff does exist.
But SOMETHING exists, of that you are certain, right?
Think carefully before you answer and disgrace yourself on this one
please.
I like you Kevin, but I shudder every time you open your mouth.
and so speaking of existing outside of timespace is not the same
> thing as speaking of eternal life within timespace,
Agreed.
YOU NEED TO READ CAREFULLY WHAT PEOPLE ARE WRITING. SPEWING
WITHOUT FIRST UNDERSTANDING THE PEOPLE ON THE GROUP IS A VIOLATION OF
USENET ETTIQUET.
I makes you look like a fool arguging against straw men, against
things no one has ever said, and it makes THEM think you are wrong when
maybe you might not be.
which implies eternal
> past lives as well as future lives within timespace,
Again you have not been reading and spout much but understand
little about what has been said.
All existence in time is in finite chunks called a while.
All whiles have a beginning and end, and may or may not include
multiples bodies, civilizations, planets, galaxies and universes.
However there probably have been and probably will be an infinite
number of whiles as they are created and destroyed by the static native
state being above time.
> The only time I become unwilling to accept the reality or unreality of
> another's experiences is when they expect me to operate off their data in my
> life. That I will not do, as it amounts to a compromise of my own reality.
You better have SOME agreed upon reality with your pc if you are
going to audit them, other wise you will be continuously auditing them
away from their desired reality or demanding proof from them about their
realities, covertly or overtly.
In fact I would bet that if you were thrown into session to have
your auditoring overts pulled, there would be a lot of covert and overt
low reality invalidation of the pc and auditing them in directions of
reality acceptable TO YOU, and operating covert efforts gainst them to
prove their reality, should they go astray from what is comfortable for
you.
> attainment of that "state" the goal. I consider the goal being the learning
> of the discipline of completing cycles of action, learning to spot charge,
> and to release it on your own, such that you can be fully responsible for
> your own condition in any game you are playing.
This is silly, if you didn't create the game, or buy from it
from another and choose to enter it, then ones responsibility is
near zero.
SCIENTOLOGY DEFINTION OF RESPONSIBILTIY: Knowing willing cause with
full awareness of the possible consequences, in general if not in
specific.
How can you be responsible for your condition if you didn't
CHOOSE to be a body or on Earth, or in this universe?
"Who or what made you?"
"WHAT ARE YOU DOING IN A BODY?" (How did this come to be.)
Spare me the willy in the wendy routine.
>> "Oh and I also admit that asking another to prove some OT power or
>> another first of all wouldn't prove anything to me because I would doubt
>> my own sanity shortly thereafter, but second of all would in fact
>> endanger the life and loved ones of the demonstrator, and is thus very
>> crude and rude and uncivilized of me to do so."
>>
>
> Yeah, well, I don't agree that is the case. While I might doubt my own
> sanity, it wouldn't be the first time, and I came through just fine, but
> applying my own self-discovered version of the locational (confusion
> formula), which I discovered prior to scientology exposure, while on acid.
> When having a bad time, I simply would start making contact with reality,
> until such time as I would realize that the "bad time" was "just the drug",
> or some other such realization, and that I would be fine, that I had been
> fine all along, and that I had just been afraid of a new state of mind. As
> to the danger to the person or their loved ones, perhaps that would be true
> if the demonstration was something which destabilized things for people who
> were more powerful and who were capable of some form of punishment, but I'm
> not sure I believe that such beings exist, or that a demonstration of such
> ability would necessarily require a destabilization of their game on a scale
> that would matter to them.
Your beliefs add up to a lot of shallowness about the, power of the
subject you claim to know so much about.
But as long as you are willing to accept that OTHERS have different
beliefs about the dangerers of demonstrating powers, and grant them the
right to withhold and discourage such, without demeaning them, or
besmirching their integrity or character, then your position is possibly
acceptable.
However any slightest violation of total granting of beingness to
those who follow the Prime Directive, (don't demonstrate to those who
don't have the power themselves), will be considered a suppressive act
on this group and dealt with accordingly.
Homer
Homer Wilson Smith
>> "Who or what is responsible for your condition?"
>
> I am Homer but I have got into the habit of blaming everyone else.
Good textbook answer, but a better answer from a higher
viewpoint is
WE are responsible for OUR condition.
That allows for pandeterminism, and cross being control and
creation.
> For me it depends which way I look at it, I can look at this from a linear
> time way or stand back and view it from a holographic way, in other words,
Yes, I no longer believe in linear lives on Earth, too many dreams
where I recognize who and where I am and the people I loved and hated in
those times, and the music I played, and the color of the pot that I
smoked, but none of these places are on Earth.
> It's all here and you can tap into any part of it.
> The only problem I have with the holographic view is Why cannot we tap into
> the future as easily as we can the past and I can only think that has to do
> with personal considerations, we all have these postulates in us, such as,
> "We never know whats round the corner", " The future is unknown", postulates
> like that and there are probably thousands like that.
The question is a very good one,
"The caliper of the caliber of souls is the questions they
have asked and the answers they have rejected."
Access to the past and access to future is hindered by our
understanding that since the past has happened, it is totally
determined, there can be only one past. But the future hasn't
happened yet, and although not unlimited in what can happen,
certainly there are many different outcomes that are possible.
Quantum deals with it by saying that existence is a wave form
of possibilities, and that perception in the present precipitates
the wave form into a specific 'this happened and that didn't' The
future is still unprecipitated, and so remains only possibilities.
We would also have to acknowledge that life is a game, and
knowing the future ruins the game by determining it.
Knowing the future is not totally out, if the tsunami is coming
at us, we know in 10 seconds it will hit, not a certainty, but
a good bet.
Knowing back in 1610 that there would be a nukie in 2013 is
the same kind of thing, not a game destroyer, but gives us a hint
of what we might do to survive it, not make it not happen.
The great writers on these subjects have said that as one goes high
enough, one does get to see the many different futures, but even still
one doesn't know which way the conscious cloud of beings will move
through them as one does not know whether the cloud turned right or left
at each akashic record choosing point.
So maybe we need to understand that it is not the future
that is weird for being undetermined, but that the past is by
pretending to be concrete.
Perhaps if we really looked into the past we could see all the
possible pasts that could have been, but weren't because of choices of
the conscious cloud moving through them, but we can CHANGE those choices
NOW as if they happened in the past, and thus rearrange the present.
Thus processes based on rewriting the past, even if only on
as as if basis 'What would I be like if this or that hadn't happened',
are very powerful. Case is a lot easier to rearrange than physical
matter for the little woggy in session, but who knows for a real OT,
they might be able to change things.
Again too much ability to change the past or know the future
is a game destroyer, so all these things will exist bound by limits
imposed from the top to keep the game going.
Time resets are another example in this field, we have
a little nukie a bit too early, and we all exteriorize and say,
screw that, turn it back, let's do it again and not have that
nukie.
It's an arcade dream after all, the possibilities are miraculous.
> After the session I thought to myself that there was something odd about
> this, true enough as a person releases charge from the incident the story
> can change even to something completely different to what they origionaly
> told me but here within this incident which I assumed was a fixed incident,
> a fixed memory from the past I was able to get them to explore that
> environment, it took me a long time to get an understanding about that.
This reminds me that in running out the death of my father, I had
to run the many things I SHOULD HAVE done or COULD HAVE DONE the morning
I found his body, before I could get grief on it to blow off. Running
only exactly what happened just didn't work.
> This is not just the imagination, you can find incidents even within just
> this life time, things that actually happened to the person and instead of
> just running a fixed memory you can explore many different things.
Yes, full hologram seems to be stored for every moment, whether
the person was aware of it or not, including full hologram from all
other viewpoints in the hologram for quite a ways out.
I hate to bring up BT's or body beings, but they are not all in
the body, and there are millions of them, and they all have different
viewpoints of any moment of our lives, from many feet away all the
way to inside our body.
So I tend to to just run the whole shebang, mine and their's and
everyone else's hologram of the moment who was there.
Once doesn't need to believe in BT's to run the hologram, even
things BEHIND the person at the time of the incident. You can
get a person to exterioize in the incident and see behind him!
Prove it, they scream :)
> Hubbard also said something about this and I cannot remember where, but he
> was talking about viewing past lives in a linear way as in death and then
> shortly after rebirth in another body, I am sure he said that this is not
> exactly correct but if you look at it in a non linear way you might go to
> sleep for what might seem an eternity and maybe if it is a holograph next
> time I appear I might find myself back in the middle ages being hung drawn
> and quartered, nice thought that one, that is if I don't wake up to the
> illusion.
I picture it this way. Existence is a sphere, static
is the point at the center. We issue from the static and crawl
out into time along one of the radials. Each concentric sphere we
cross is another universe on the way down to this one.
Existence in time is existence on the surface of one of the
spheres where we wander around on the surface. When we die, or
during other spiritual events, we traverse part way back up the radial
to an inner more sphere, and then come back down again along a different
radial. Thus lives can be linear but probably are not, as there
are many planets, and universes to come back down to.
IF one goes all the way back up to static, then one comes back
down along a totally new radial, and all history and prior beingness
is wiped out, one is a new being doing this for the first time.
I think death is like a rocket, we zoom back up the radial we are
on just a ways towards the center, then choose a new path to come back
down to.
Thus we keep most of our beingness intact for the new life in the
new place, but the stuff that was only for the prior places and times is
gone.
> Just for the experience maybe, I would make sure I designed it so that it
> would be very difficult to see out of the mess or game I put myself in to.
Yes.
> I believe Hubbard said something to the effect of, If we could just throw
> back the curtain, so to speak and see all that what we are doing, call it
> Enlightenment, it would be end of game, you would either have to find a new
> game or leave for a higher universe game where you would leave behind such
> things as sex, aquiring objects, ego position and operate at a higher
> aesthetic band
Also have to leave behind a lot of friends in the old game.
> I would not disagree with that about zero responsibility of my case, there
> are many things in my mind I don't like to confront and in life, but I don't
> have a rush to get anywhere with my spiritual journey I enjoy this game, not
> like the Scientology organisation rushes everyone.
Zero responsibility does not mean denying responsibility for things
you actually are responsible for, it means actually having
had no choice in the matter.
Most people define responsibility down to mean adding one's cause
into situations that one did not create.
That is a kind of partial responsibility. But true responsibility
for condition means one existed prior to any created conditions and
thus obviously had free choice in the matter. (Advanced Procedure and
Axioms.)
> Bloody hell Homer, the Being sits in eternity, it ain't going nowhere, I
> don't want to wreck the game too soon, then I will have to go and mock
> something else up, this ok for me at the moment, no rush.
Yes.
> I know that, but the mind entity wants it all now, I WANT ENLIGHTENMENT NOW!
Nah what you want is improved game fun.
Homer
Kevin Brady
No, I don't have to accept other's realities. That's not what auditing is
about! It's about getting them to inspect their reality, and clear up any
charge regarding it, such that they are free to perceive truth with greater
and greater accuracy, even if an absolute is unobtainable.
Your insinuations about my likely overts or coverts are despicable. I look
strictly for indicators, chief amongst them release of a postulate or
knowing cognizance and continued agreement with it, with return of attention
to present time. I'm not there to teach my belief system, except to people
who want to hear it.
I, too, tire of this behavior which you are attributing cause of to me.
I'm taking a breather, you can judge me in absentia. I've got better things
to do than listen to the eval of someone who thinks he is my judge.
As to whether I have perfect accuracy, or inherent flaws: well, I leave
that to common sense. Both.
And I'm out.
--
Kevin G. Brady
(415) 341-0022,
gomo...@hotmail.com
http://www.myspace.com/clear_objectives
"Homer Wilson Smith" <ho...@adore2.lightlink.com> wrote in message
news:475a...@news2.lightlink.com...
CB Willis
> Perhaps if we really looked into the past we could see all the
>possible pasts that could have been, but weren't because of choices of
>the conscious cloud moving through them, but we can CHANGE those choices
>NOW as if they happened in the past, and thus rearrange the present.
That's kind of what happens in clearing, transformation of the past.
Movie: Back to the Future, Vol. I.
In clearing we have the freedom of the timeline, stand outside it as spirit, also
witness spiritual substance flooding and transforming something, then being able to
consciously extrapolate that across other similar topics, even the entire timeline
to include past-present-future and spiritual dimensions. Spirit intervenes in
history, and is not limited by past, present, and/or future.
> Time resets are another example in this field, we have
>a little nukie a bit too early, and we all exteriorize and say,
>screw that, turn it back, let's do it again and not have that
>nukie.
When we see undesirable possibilities and probabilities, we say "I don't want to go
down that road. There has to be a better way" and stop at nothing until you
find/create a better way.
> This reminds me that in running out the death of my father, I had
>to run the many things I SHOULD HAVE done or COULD HAVE DONE the morning
>I found his body, before I could get grief on it to blow off. Running
>only exactly what happened just didn't work.
Hmmmm interesting.
> Thus lives can be linear but probably are not ...
I agree. We can be rather all over in different places and dimensions and times and
in eternity. A patchwork quilt. Many mansions.
> IF one goes all the way back up to static, then one comes back
>down along a totally new radial, and all history and prior beingness
>is wiped out, one is a new being doing this for the first time.
Homo novis
> I think death is like a rocket, we zoom back up the radial we are
>on just a ways towards the center, then choose a new path to come back
>down to.
> Thus we keep most of our beingness intact for the new life in the
>new place, but the stuff that was only for the prior places and times is
>gone.
Carol
CB Willis
> YOU NEED TO READ CAREFULLY WHAT PEOPLE ARE WRITING. SPEWING
>WITHOUT FIRST UNDERSTANDING THE PEOPLE ON THE GROUP IS A VIOLATION OF
>USENET ETTIQUET.
always a good idea
> I makes you look like a fool arguging against straw men, against
>things no one has ever said, and it makes THEM think you are wrong when
>maybe you might not be.
> You better have SOME agreed upon reality with your pc if you are
>going to audit them, other wise you will be continuously auditing them
>away from their desired reality or demanding proof from them about their
>realities, covertly or overtly.
> In fact I would bet that if you were thrown into session to have
>your auditoring overts pulled, there would be a lot of covert and overt
>low reality invalidation of the pc and auditing them in directions of
>reality acceptable TO YOU, and operating covert efforts gainst them to
>prove their reality, should they go astray from what is comfortable for
>you.
Yes very useful to have basic alignment, else danger of telepathic invalidation, or
"boredom" for some people who may be prone to it, or BOTH. Either way the
vibrations are too low (1.5 or 2.0, and 2.5) for success.
I do see Kevin entering into pretty fair dialogue here, and don't see a person
having to correct himself as a problem but as a learning experience. Admitting
error is frosting for both sides, and does contribute to completing the
communication, eliminates wondering. Extra credit for the one admitting error.
Carol
Homer Wilson Smith
> motherswith...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>That thetans do not live forever - but simply want to.
It would be impossible for something to exist or evolve
that wanted to be immortal that natively wasn't.
Sovereign desire will always out.
Homer
CB Willis
> Homer
Or as I say, "Spirit will HAVE its creation."
Carol
ho...@lightlink.com
CB Willis <cbwi...@adore2.lightlink.com> wrote:
> I do see Kevin entering into pretty fair dialogue here, and don't see a person
> having to correct himself as a problem but as a learning experience. Admitting
> error is frosting for both sides, and does contribute to completing the
> communication, eliminates wondering. Extra credit for the one admitting error.
Sorry I see Kevin strutting into this forum with a complete, almost
criminal, lack of debating discipline, acting the way 3 years do to make
each other wrong.
He seems to be most aware of Grade IV, and perhaps he should get to
work on it for real, he teaches best what he most needs to learn.
His write up that started the thread is an appalling damnation of
90 percent of Scientology theory and practice. To claim to be an
auditor, and then reject the greater part of Hubbard's work as nuts, is
the sign of a pin head out of its pin cushion.
Scientology is based on the axioms which state very clearly that
the world is a dream, a mockup, that we ourselves made. If being able to
make a universe isn't an OT ability, then I don't know what is. Anyone
can cast the mountain sidesways if he can put it there in the first
place.
We are trying to rehab OT's on this group, not support little
wogglets who have picked up a meter and learned how to make it read but
who don't believe in anything beyond ... well you name it.
And although some pc's need to solve their PTP's before auditing
can continue, taking off the auditor's hat and putting on a consultant's
hat shows an inability to use the tech to get the person to help
himself.
Not to mention a total lack of understanding about how problems
work. Maybe the guy wouldn't need a consultant or would go find one, if
he didn't need the problem he was in.
I know a few auditors that turn their sessions into consulting
sessions at the drop of a pin, and it just leads no where,
but its addicative as hell, and the pc continues to pay for it.
IN SESSION means the auditor asks 'What's it?" and the pc answers
'Itsa'.
OUT OF SESSION means the pc asks "Whats it?" and the auditor answers
"Itsa".
Consulting = out of session.
Kevin's inability to cleanly apologize for wrongs done on this group
without adding issues or going 'et tu brutus', and to also cleanly admit
weaseling when caught red handed misinterpreting my words, indicates a
being more dangerous to have in a group than not.
If this were my private list, he would be out of here.
But I know the rest of you guys like the little shit, so I won't
even ask for a vote.
Maybe someday you will have the good fortune to be audited by him
and run into a demon BT, past life or universe, and you will feel his
auditor's presence wilt tring to stear you back to acceptable realities.
Then you will know what a dangerous auditor can do.
Jesus, he has lived how long and has not a single hint of a past or
future or out of body or native state existence anywhere in his entire
life's experience?
And I thought I was a bowling ball.
He should consider getting a job as a headstone.
Homer
> Carol
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
ho...@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Sun Dec 9 00:47:35 EST 2007
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore560.memo
Send mail to archive.com saying help
CB Willis
> Sorry I see Kevin strutting into this forum with a complete, almost
>criminal, lack of debating discipline, acting the way 3 years do to make
>each other wrong.
The arrogance of youth.
None of us here have ever made anyone else wrong, ever ever ever.
I do chide on rare occasion.
And try to elicit the truth out of someone if I suspect they're just doing posturing
and PR only.
Carol
Homer Wilson Smith
> None of us here have ever made anyone else wrong, ever ever ever.
Then you clearly never read what I write.
The issue is not making others wrong, the issue is CHEATING AND
desiring or enforcing demonstration of ability.
The things written here are for those to demonstrate to themselves.
They are lucky these various things were pointed out to them in the
first place, most go over their heads.
Homer
CB Willis
>desiring or enforcing demonstration of ability.
For me, that falls under "good try but no cigar". Or, "you can ASK....".
I just shrug it off.
>
> The things written here are for those to demonstrate to themselves.
>They are lucky these various things were pointed out to them in the
>first place, most go over their heads.
>
> Homer
Spirit moves in its own ways and timing, in real-life circumstances, not as a
laboratory experiment.
Carol