Questioning Scientology

GuessWhere2

Hinduism allows its scriptures to be questioned.

Buddha encouraged his disciples to question his teachings.

Knowledge grows when it is questioned and discussed. For inconsistencies are then discovered and eliminated.

Why does Scientology prohibit its followers to question and discuss its knowledge?

If Scientology must grow it should allow its theories to be examined, questioned, challenged and discussed by its followers.

The other option would be for Scientology to go the way of the Catholic Church – moving lifelessly only because of past momentum.

.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

Comments

  • MarkNR  On December 3, 2013 at 8:08 PM

    To Vinaire:
    I would like to send Chris that article which lays out the origin of individuality, the relationship of theta to individuality, oneness. But it is a little long to post as a comment, about 2 pages. Is there a simple way?
    Mark

    • vinaire  On December 3, 2013 at 8:32 PM

      You may post it as “part 1”, “part 2” etc. by breaking it down into several sections. I shall make sure that these sections are kept together.

  • Elizabeth Hamre  On December 3, 2013 at 8:08 PM

    V…..”Correct! The KHTK word for this is inconsistency. 🙂

    We have an inconsistency here… a lack of consistency or harmony. Inconsistencies abound among different religions.”””
    And mindfulness is the way for achieve harmony and than all is well in the Universe.. all will stop existing.. there will be no continual creation allowed because that would cause inconsistencies. That has been achieved in the Universe.. the track is littered by incidents like that.. go into any Monastery and you can experience the left over from civilization like that.. Even the creations of Laws of this Planets are the left over from places like that… to make all equal, to have harmony …. do not work..

    • vinaire  On December 3, 2013 at 8:34 PM

      What is your ideal scene of “working”?

      .

      • Elizabeth Hamre  On December 3, 2013 at 8:35 PM

        please be so kind and answer those question I have asked.

        • vinaire  On December 3, 2013 at 8:50 PM

          Please repeat your question, because I feel I have answwered them.

          Maybe my answer is unacceptable to you.

      • Elizabeth Hamre  On December 3, 2013 at 8:41 PM

        I think I sign off here since my questions are ignored yet I feel they were valid.

        • vinaire  On December 3, 2013 at 8:50 PM

          Are you blaming me?

        • vinaire  On December 3, 2013 at 9:00 PM

          Elizabeth, if you are blaming me then you are making me responsible for your condition.

          Now that poses another inconsistency because, as I understand, you make everyone responsible for their own condition.

          Now we have come a full circle. Either you are for clearing the planet or you are not.

        • Elizabeth Hamre  On December 3, 2013 at 9:52 PM

          now who is doing the judging here, I don’t blame any one and what ever I experience I am the creator of that. THAT I HAVE A CASE IS YOUR REALITY< COME FROM YOUR JUDGEMANT. and about clearing the Planet I have done my share since 1973 and just because you don't have reality of my reality what solo auditing do that do not means what you are indicating that I do not do. THE END.. thank you

        • vinaire  On December 3, 2013 at 10:13 PM

          To quote you, “I am simply expressing my reality”.

          See, you can’t have it both ways.

          .

  • vinaire  On December 3, 2013 at 8:39 PM

    From https://vinaire.me/2013/11/14/questioning-scientology-knowledge/#comment-14942
    E…”It explains how you see your own creation and no more outside of that What I read is my reality and that is not your reality”

    .

    I don’t assume that I create. Whatever this “I” is, it is the resiltant vector of surrounding considerations. “I” represents those considerations. It does not create those considerations.

    Reality is simply what is there. I am not creating that reality. Even my “will” is part of the resultant.

  • MarkNR  On December 3, 2013 at 8:41 PM

    In the beginning.
    There is the potential. There is nothing else nor has there ever been anything else. There are no rules or ideas about how things should be. There are no things. There is no universe, nor a thought that something like that should be. There are no others since the potential is infinity and the thought of numbers or others hasn’t been thought of. It is everything that exists.
    There is no mass, ARC, communication, goal, or action of any kind. They haven’t been invented yet. Have you ever been just sitting, not doing anything, or doing TR-0 and for a few seconds you didn’t think of anything or look at anything or anything at all for a short time? That’s the potential.
    Suddenly out of nothing there was the decision to be, to continue to be. That was the invention of time. One thought following another in the one way arrow of time. Thoughts flooded. This was fun, interesting. This was also the beginning of beingness. Then there was the desire for something to occur. This was pondered for some time. A second, a year, a millennium. And you decided to create. A point to view from a point of view. And that was the beginning of matter and space.
    AND THAT WAS THE FIRST LIE. THAT’S NOT ME. You created something over there and you are over here. Distance was the first mistake. You had to pretend there was distance. Since you ARE everything that exists, distance is an invented consideration. Now this wasn’t bad, there was no such thing as bad. At least something was happening. There was no overt, no confusion, only creation. Remember, you are the only thing that exists. When you create something, it is not something else from you, it is not a part of you. IT IS YOU. THERE IS NOTHING ELSE OTHER THAN YOU. You are not ‘connected’ to it. It is you. This is a very important concept. It is absolutely vital. Now there was nothing wrong with pretending. It’s necessary for creation, for occurrence, for action, for life to DO something .
    So you made more points and more points and patterns and then shapes and this was quite an accomplishment. You worked quite hard at it and learned and practiced and it was great. Then the idea struck you that you could move these things around and energy was born. Wow. Now you could really Do stuff. Motion. Patterns of motion. Fun. And you made all sorts of patterns of motion and activity and such. And again it was a big accomplishment and you had a great time. Work and practice and learning, on and on. But there was something wrong. Everything you did was controlled by you. Hell, it was you. It’s like controlling every detail of your own dreams. It became boring. No randomity. I know, I’ll make two things and neither will know what the other is doing. They can interact yet independently. AND THERE WAS THE SECOND BIG LIE. I DIDN’T DO THAT. I’m not responsible. But it wasn’t bad at the time. There was no such thing as a lie or a mistake. This was a new fun game. It was, again, great.
    But this, also, was the first separation. It appeared as though you were telling this point what to do and telling that point what to do and watching them interact. But a more accurate analogy is standing at one point, saying and doing something, then taking two steps forward, turning around and saying and doing something else and pretending you are separate. A friend once told me that pan determinism is being able to play both sides of chess without cheating. I now realize that that is the origin of no responsibility. That’s not me. I didn’t do that. At the time it was no problem. There was no such thing as a problem. It hadn’t been invented yet. There was nothing above you saying this is how you do it or this is right or this is wrong. But remember, you are not creating something other than yourself and telling it what to do. You are everything that exists and you are learning to pretend to put up walls and dividers within yourself and pretend they are separate entities within you. This was fun and you practiced and practiced and got better and better at it. You got really good at pretending that when you were over here, you didn’t know what you were thinking when you were over there. And thus INDIVIDUALITY was born. Now, it’s not like you were sitting over here and making all these lesser entities and telling them what to do and watching them go at it. That’s what you thought. But in actuality there is the ultimate truth that you are the only thing that exists or ever has existed. Each thing or intention or potential you create is you, 100%. Each separation is the entire whole. In the theta realm there are no percentages. Infinity is without numbers. You can be 100% this and 100% that at the same time. A quick glance at Quantum Physics will give you some idea of the unreality of position and quantity. Particles can be in more than one place and yet no place at the same time. Their quantity can only be measured in averages since individual particles don’t actually exist. Such as is with theta. Each portion is equal to the whole. You can be your fathers son and your wife’s husband with full ability in each. What you have forgotten is that you can be both separately at the same time. And your bosses employee and your helpers boss and your buddy’s friend etc. etc. etc.
    These are the two original sins. That’s not me. I didn’t do that.
    Denial of beingness and responsibility.
    Altering actuality and denying it.
    But still there was nothing wrong with that. You were having fun, creating all the rules, working, practicing, making the foundation for all the future. Here came the problem. It wasn’t pain, confusion, goals or failures. It was wins ! ! ! It was really fun to pretend to separate yourself, to build imaginary walls in yourself and create randomity, action, experience. Stuff was happening. You were getting better at it. How would you feel if you spent 1000 years on a new and exciting project and succeeded at every idea and intention. How long and how much practice would it take you to control two objects completely independently of each other. To be completely clever and agile with one thing you’re controlling without something else you’re controlling knowing or being affected. How about 100 or 1000 objects or intentions or entities. That would be quite an accomplishment, a great feat. And that’s what stuck ! ! ! As Ron said, All postulates are aberrative. These were the first and they set the pattern for the rest of the half of eternity that has followed. It’s not that you failed and were upset. It’s that you succeeded and you liked it. This fact is very very important.
    And what about now.
    The Wog, Atheistic viewpoint of beingness is of an advanced chemical computer capable of thought and decisions. The next gradient up is a body with its own capabilities but controlled by a spiritual being inside or around the body. The next gradient closer to actuality is a body controlled by an individual with no actual position in space or outside of space whose attention has been narrowed and directed toward a body only. But, the closest to truth that I can put into words from what I have learned and what I have seen is as follows:
    There is Life, Theta. The potential. There are practiced, pretended viewpoints which you have gotten so good at making that now the best words for it are entities, individuals. Each equal to the whole because each actually is the whole. You are still the only thing that exists. Everything you created that you pretended was something other than you is, still actually you. The potential is infinity and by definition infinity can be divided infinitely and each division is still the whole. The entire and all universes are within you and your attention is directed toward a single point, currently a body. You are an individual, 100%. You are yourself, completely responsible for yourself and fully self determined. You are also The Potential, fully and completely. When I said you learned how to make points and make them move, I meant You. You are fully and actually the creator of all the universes. And you are 1 individual. You are both.
    Continued………..

  • MarkNR  On December 3, 2013 at 8:48 PM

    Continuation…….Please start with the first post

    This explains ARC. When you have perfect affinity there is zero distance, you occupy the same position in space. Absolute reality is seeing from exactly the same viewpoint. Total communication is perfect duplication, again zero distance. Absolute perfect ARC is being the other individual. Most people believe that we are all connected to another or others. A more advanced idea is that others are a part of us, that we are a part of each other. The truth is that guy down the street smoking a cigarette asking for a dollar, IS YOU. Not metaphorically, not literally, but actually. You are you, completely, an individual. And you are him also, 100%. You are both. Ron realized this at least by 1952 and probably sooner. That’s why he said that you will not truly be free until all are free. But with full responsibility. All these games and future games are fine and fun as long as you know fully what you’re doing.
    That is why, in my opinion, and from what I’ve learned and seen, that the most important principals in Scientology to strive to understand are responsibility of action and occurrence, and responsibility and willingness of beingness. “ That IS Me. I Did that.” To be able to duplicate without alteration. Altering truth is what gave us this big fun playground and our very existence, but it is also what got us into this mess. I also fully realize that in order to be free from the foibles of your case and the universe and interaction with others you must master these things. In fact to be free of everything you must master everything. Now don’t get overwhelmed. You already have most (some) of the knowledge needed to get there. Many of the methods to get there have already been developed. As with OT levels, you will learn (study), discover (audit), AND EXPERIENCE BY GOING OUT AND LIVING, OBSERVING. Other spiritual sciences follow the same pattern. The word ‘Audit’ could become ‘introspection’ or ‘re-discovery’. One point which is not emphasized nearly enough is that observing life is necessary to fill in all the blanks and nuances that are between the words and gain certainty on all the principals and concepts in existence. It will take a little diligence for a few hundred years or so, but that’s nothing compared to what you’ve been through.

  • vinaire  On December 4, 2013 at 6:45 AM

    Mark… “In the beginning. There is the potential…”

    .

    And how does that potential come about? Is there a potential of potential? This is just a pretension to know.

    The fact is we do not know how the considerations fundamentally appear and disappear. There is a concatenation of considerations, which appears tautological when looked closely.

    So, the word ‘potential’ may make one feel better, but it doesn’t tell much.

    .

    • MarkNR  On December 4, 2013 at 8:43 AM

      Hi Vin:
      Ya got me, there. I cannot defend or explain what is beyond that wall. I have no concept of time before time. Potential is not the perfect word, but it is, to me, the closest I can come up with which describes this area. There may not be adequate terms. Tautological arguments are all I can give you for now.
      But the real value of the paper is in the treatment of oneness and individuality. In the self imposed implants/imprints which molded one’s beingness in the early times, especially the accomplishments through long efforts.
      Your ‘discussion’ with Eliz. prompted me to post this article. “Compassion” took on new meanings to me when I saw portions of this area. I could never view others the same after realizing my true connection to life. ARC became very real to me and a deep love of others was uncovered. The desire for the bliss of oneness and joining with another resolved issues I had had all my life. My marriage changed completely.
      Also, the concept that all the ‘rules’ of life and universes are thought up, invented and aren’t necessarily bad if fully known and understood.
      I believe these things have great value.
      Mark

      • vinaire  On December 4, 2013 at 8:54 AM

        I get you. I call this area ‘unknowable’ because I don’t want to pretend that I can know it by using such words as potential, theta, static, etc.

        One cannot really isolate oneself from life and hide in “one’s universe” as Scientology seems to advise. There is no island of individuality.

        I have started to look at this same area through the use of Subject Clearing. See

        https://vinaire.me/2013/11/26/mindful-subject-clearing/#comment-14992

        .

      • vinaire  On December 4, 2013 at 1:40 PM

        Mark… “But the real value of the paper is in the treatment of oneness and individuality. In the self imposed implants/imprints which molded one’s beingness in the early times, especially the accomplishments through long efforts.”

        Ok, I shall go through the rest of your paper and comment on it.

        That is great about your new understanding of the word “compassion”. That concept seems to be missing in Scientology. “Affinity” doesn’t mean quite the same thing. “Affinity” has the condition of exchange tied to it, whereas, compassion is totally unconditional.

        .

  • vinaire  On December 4, 2013 at 1:48 PM

    Mark… “Suddenly out of nothing there was the decision to be, to continue to be. That was the invention of time.”

    The idea of “decision” is superfluous. When something appears out of nothing, it is so because it is being. So, through mindfulness we shall see only the fact of “being”. The idea of decision is an additive.

    Hubbard used the additive of decision because he assumed Cause to be there. Well, how does Cause gets to be there?

    I do not see Cause to be there in the beginning. I just see things appearing and disappearing.

    .

    • Chris Thompson  On December 4, 2013 at 6:20 PM

      VInaire: I just see things appearing and disappearing.

      Chris: This is good “obnosis” without assumptions.

    • Chris Thompson  On December 4, 2013 at 6:30 PM

      Dropping one’s assumptions in favor of looking and seeing what is there without added assumptions takes practice and a bit of getting used to. Our assumptions are put there to smooth the inconsistencies in our lives and the product of that is a ballooning sphere of considerations. “Obnosis” from Scientology or “mindfulness” as we discuss it on this blog smooth inconsistencies like removing rocks from a field and result in both smoothing the inconsistencies in our lives and also shrinking the balloon of considerations. I believe my metaphor can hold up when I call this balloon the “self.” The ballooning “self,” the individuated individual, egotism: These for me are the cause of strife and friction between one another. Shrinking the big sense of self is important when seeking harmony in life. This how I would describe the path I am trying to walk.

      • vinaire  On December 4, 2013 at 6:48 PM

        Good post!

        • Chris Thompson  On December 4, 2013 at 8:25 PM

          Thank you Vinaire. I see ideologies as an entire subset of ignorance, substituting mental constructs, entire “Rube Goldbergs,” to do our thinking for us rather than looking and seeing things as they are without assumptions.

        • vinaire  On December 4, 2013 at 9:46 PM

          Well expressed!

        • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 12:00 AM

          You really nailed it when you wrote “seeing things as they are without assumptions.” I am getting a lot of mileage out of this.

        • vinaire  On December 5, 2013 at 5:15 AM

          That is wonderful. I am getting a lot of mileage out of it too.

        • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 12:42 AM

          LOL !

  • Chris Thompson  On December 4, 2013 at 6:18 PM

    Vinaire: So, through mindfulness we shall see only the fact of “being”. The idea of decision is an additive.

    Chris: I believe this can be consistent with what we would observe doing “obnosis drilling.”

  • vinaire  On December 4, 2013 at 9:57 PM

    > Mark…”That was the invention of time. One thought following another in the one way arrow of time.”

    Time is simply an aspect of existence. When there is no existence there is no time. A characteristic of time is the sequence attributed to the variations in motion

    • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 12:08 AM

      Mark, Vinay has a much much better ability to pull thoughts apart and to organize and to analyze than I. I have kind of been busy plus hanging back with regard to the critique that you asked about regarding your paper. I did read it and like it very much. There is nothing wrong with your understanding and if you mean for that understanding to grow, and I can see that you do, you only have to continue. The path is ripe with the fruit of knowledge and it changes and changes and changes. We will have many good and lively discussions if you want to, but I do not want to be put in the position of “critiquing” a real seeker of wisdom such as yourself. We each have wisdom, some here and some there, if we simply discuss our interests with an earnest yearning for knowledge we will teach and learn from each other.

      • MarkNR  On December 5, 2013 at 10:56 AM

        Chris”
        Critique is not what I was asking for, although it is gladly and mindfully accepted. Additional and different ideas are most desired. I find my ability increasing to sensibly accept the pointing out of errors and to consider it a favor. An ability I find lacking in many of those around me.
        I do consider later portions of my article to be of greater importance, especially oneness and ARC. That discovery has had the most profound effect on myself and was also mentioned in the article on Affinity posted earlier.
        I always look forward to your comments.
        Mark

        • vinaire  On December 5, 2013 at 1:20 PM

          I am slowly working through your article. I am sorry it is taking time.

          Time is so ponderous, you know.

        • MarkNR  On December 5, 2013 at 4:20 PM

          We don’t have the time to ponder the meaning of time. I wonder what it will be like in my future to recall this very moment. I’m getting a headache.
          Mark

        • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 5:34 PM

          LOL!

    • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 12:15 AM

      Regarding time, I am learning how bonded that time is to space so am learning when and if I can even separate them. It can be convenient to think of time as an arrow on a piece of graph paper but I find that a fractal model works better and is more satisfying to me. Space-time, like all Nature, seems to manifest in a dynamic, recursive, and self similar way. In other words, similar to circular, but not circular, space-time is curved and turns back, maybe not quite upon itself but nevertheless turns back so that if I peer off into the distance and look far enough I imagine that I may see the back of my head. I am fond of repeating and everyone is probably tired of reading me write that life is not normally laid out quite right. The new kind of science that we are on the cutting edge of might lay out existence in quite a different way than we had been taught. And why wouldn’t it? Hasn’t science always done that? Now at the cusp of the beginning of the “information age” how much more will science reshape our perception of our worlds?

      • vinaire  On December 5, 2013 at 7:50 AM

        Existence is basically MOTION. If there were no motion in atoms or in fundamental particles there would be no matter, no form, no persistence, no space, and no time.

      • MarkNR  On December 5, 2013 at 10:39 AM

        I feel as though there should be some simple, straightforward principals of time which are primary, with more abstract, nebulous aspects being secondary. I cannot seem to get a handle on which should be more primary, the abstract, or the more solid.
        With regards to mass, it seems that the solidity arises from the more basic, abstract ideas.
        It may be that the intention to continue was primary and the ‘how to continue’ is secondary. Also, the idea of primary and secondary implies that time was necessary for the rules of time to be laid forth. Circular, confused thinking.

        Ponderous.
        Mark

        • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 11:00 AM

          MNR: I feel as though there should be some simple, straightforward principals of time which are primary, with more abstract, nebulous aspects being secondary.

          CT: I think you are right. The approach that Vinay and the rest of us blogging here are employing is to mindfully notice what is an assumption. We believe that underlying removed assumptions lies greater relative truth. But relax and don’t worry about it. Allow these assumptions to unstack naturally through mindfulness, watchfulness, obnosefulness and have a good time. hahaha

        • MarkNR  On December 6, 2013 at 2:05 PM

          Chris:
          Thanks, I think I’m getting better at it. Vin’s Subject Clearing, done just after a session, and then reviewing that session, I believe may prove very fruitful indeed. Sort of like doing a CS-1 post-op and then going back and looking for more. This may reduce or nearly eliminate BPC.
          Data of great magnitude.
          Mark

        • Chris Thompson  On December 6, 2013 at 3:32 PM

          This is an excellent example of simply using what one knows (tools), putting them together with more tools and getting on with watching, looking, listening, being mindful. Your post has reminded me of something I noticed which was that “going for a great ‘truth’ ” can be frustrating since we can’t really tell where to look. Also, there doesn’t seem to be a great “truth” condensed and buried out there to find. What there seems to be is understanding that truth is conditioned, relative, and impermanent. Working with that understanding helps me maintain equilibrium and the desire to continue. Vinay’s insistence on removing assumptions and inconsistencies is something we can do and is in fact what good auditing does. I’m watching this occurring while I write and see the condensation happening right before my mind’s eye(s). And now I’m watching it morph with time as I watch it. I still don’t get the mechanics, I just see what is occurring. I believe I will continue.

        • MarkNR  On December 20, 2013 at 3:10 PM

          Thanks, Chris. I get lucky every now and then.
          I don’t agree with everything Ron wrote, but one thing stuck with me. Paraphrase. “It’s fine to have an open mind, as long as that openness doesn’t consist of holes (in your head).” A balance between mindfulness and the ability to decide is important to me. There is value in the confidence of knowing what you know.
          You know a lot. Recognize it.
          Mark

        • Chris Thompson  On December 20, 2013 at 10:50 PM

          Thank you Mark. You know a lot too, that is plain to read. What I see is a big universe for which my metaphors are not laid out very well. I am trying for better metaphors for the processes that I am aware of.

        • MarkNR  On December 21, 2013 at 12:40 AM

          Thanks Chris.
          I’m thinking of manufacturing personal watercraft. (Jet Skis) I found a plastics mfg. who makes a polycarbonate that is as strong under impact as fiberglass at half the weight and can be vacuum molded. Kymco out of Taiwan is an excellent small engine maker with a very reasonable cost structure.
          How do you like the name “Seanami” Catchy I think.
          No one makes a 5-600cc watercraft any more, and in my experience, the more nimble ones are more fun than the 9-1300cc waterbikes.
          My enthusiasm and reach has grown lately.
          Have a wonderful Christmas season.
          Love to all.
          Mark

        • Chris Thompson  On December 21, 2013 at 10:21 AM

          Excellent ideas and name. If you solve capital, marketing, marketing and sales, and service after the sale you may have a complete package.

          I wonder if people would buy even smaller machines?

        • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 11:09 AM

          MNR: Circular, confused thinking.

          Chris: When this happens as it does to us all, relax and go out in the kitchen and tell your wife you lover her and go for a walk and eat a cookie but not too many cookies… “Take a bath,” as Archimedes is reported to have done before his discovery of the displacement of water and try not needlessly piss off any Roman soldiers. These epiphanies don’t seem to respond to angst.

        • MarkNR  On December 5, 2013 at 12:05 PM

          Very good advice. I am going to repair that grounding conductor on the electrical service. Work settles me. Thanks.
          Mark

    • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 12:18 AM

      Scientology has taught a model of existence with roots in snippets of other religions and I believe this needs remodeling as well.

    • MarkNR  On December 5, 2013 at 10:25 AM

      Time seems to be a subject of question lately.
      Physical existence, basically, as I understand it, would consist of width, breadth, length, and duration. For something to exist it must have duration. In Hubbards philosophy, the primary ingredient for duration is change. Something must be physically different from one moment to the next in order to physically exist even if that difference is only a change in relative position to other objects. This is one aspect of existence that never seemed intuitive to me. 3 dimensions seemed matter of fact in order to have substance, but this one seemed somewhat artificial, invented.
      I think of time more as compiled events, all adding on top of each other. Before an event occurs, it is variable, an idea only, subject to the creativity of an individual or individuals. Once there is occurrence, it seems that it is locked in, impossible to completely forget. Change seems to be more of a necessity when it comes to storage of information, keeping the past organized, in order. To prevent everything from running together. Also, to keep track of cause and effect. Confusion and inconsistencies would run rampant without the order of time. Simultaneousness of events doesn’t seem workable to me.
      This is a subject that I don’t have locked down. Many questions.
      Mark

      • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 10:39 AM

        MNR: This is a subject that I don’t have locked down. Many questions.

        CT: Excellent!

      • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 10:40 AM

        MNR: Time seems to be a subject of question lately.

        CT: I like your sense of humor!

        • MarkNR  On December 5, 2013 at 11:47 AM

          I was wondering if anyone would catch that.
          Mark

      • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 10:42 AM

        MNR: This is one aspect of existence that never seemed intuitive to me

        CT: My best epiphanies have not been initially intuitive. Quantum physics is not intuitive. And I try to keep in mind that physics is science and not philosophy.

        • MarkNR  On December 5, 2013 at 11:32 AM

          Thanks, Chris
          Most of my most significant gains came when something was not intuitive, full of inconsistencies.
          As more data was viewed, clarity unfolded. When I avoided something that didn’t seem to make sense, little or no gain occurred. Often, the original postulate wasn’t enough. The original consideration underlying the believed original consideration often had to be ferreted out. Usually a very subtle thought or something mentioned in passing by someone else.I have discovered lately that conscious effort can halt my discovery. I have also discovered that simply allowing something to come to me has very limited workability. There is an in between effort and allowing. It is a doingness without trying as the famous Yoda pointed out.
          I have been practicing scanning events over time with no effort. Simply look and see but with a direction in mind. It is much easier than ‘searching’ as I had done before. Meter steering with one eye, looking for an identical read while scanning has been helpful. I have been learning to incorporate it with no dependance. It takes some practice.
          Mark

        • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 12:12 PM

          Very good points Mark. Vin and I are calling that in between area of attention “Mindfulness” which is just a word for trying to listen and pay attention. You are describing to me the same thing.

        • MarkNR  On December 5, 2013 at 4:29 PM

          I find more common ground between us each day. When we have a similar idea, and you word it a different way, I gain a deeper understanding of the principal.
          Thanks, Mark
          PS I have been writing in generalistic principals for the most part. In the future I will give more detailed examples of occurrances I have viewed. There have been a few interesting ones. Like the time I got tricked into falling into this gooey sticky muck and my rivals laughed. Seems they had planned it all along. My sleek four legs weren’t well built for getting out.
          Mark

        • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 5:36 PM

          MNR: Like the time I got tricked into falling into this gooey sticky muck and my rivals laughed

          CT: hahaha well, Vinay and I would never dream of doing something like that to you with these word games! (wink)

        • MarkNR  On December 6, 2013 at 12:08 AM

          Chris, Vin:
          Thanks, it’s nice to know you have friends you can trust, UH, HMM.

          That incident tracked back to an earlier incident of trickery and humiliation. And I found what I was looking for. It was the first time I got the idea “You won’t be laughing after I get you back. Before that, when there were winners and losers we all laughed. But not that time. I had betrayed a friend because I wanted the credit for being smart, and I got caught. I had messed up a meadow that he had spent a long time preparing. Before that was a game in which trickery and deceit were the game, but it was fun and everyone knew what we were doing, but the seed was planted. This was before star and planet type universes.
          I have found that there are many indicators of a final EP but the one I trust the most is a great big long laugh, often a line charge. It feels good.
          Mark

        • Chris Thompson  On December 6, 2013 at 12:39 AM

          Mark: I have found that there are many indicators of a final EP but the one I trust the most is a great big long laugh, often a line charge. It feels good.

          Chris: Agreed. This is good advice. But what if the “final EP” were to be relative, conditioned and impermanent? Just asking what if it were? Could we live with that? Would our, could our paradigm for this whole game change? And to what? I’m asking what if the “truth” turns out to be and understanding about the relative conditioned impermanence of the universe? Can we use that for a good and useful turn of events?

        • MarkNR  On December 6, 2013 at 1:01 AM

          Hopefully changing bodies won’t wipe out all the work I have done. LOL
          Mark

        • vinaire  On December 6, 2013 at 6:52 AM

          It would be interesting to clear up words like, GAME, TRICK, TRICKERY, DECEIT, BETRAYAL, HUMILIATION, WINNER, LOSER, SMART, LAUGH, and related words per Subject Clearing.

          .

        • MarkNR  On December 6, 2013 at 11:45 AM

          Vin:
          I have preached over and over about the value of a structured, methodical and systematic method of enlightenment and the importance of applying long term effort. And here I am again humbled by your wisdom.
          I shall apply your advice. It can only make things better, possibly greatly so.
          Mark

        • MarkNR  On December 6, 2013 at 12:58 AM

          Here is one aspect of what I understand mindfulness and the Tao to include. I have been doing this to some extent all my life without really realizing it, but now I recognize it.
          When I gather, observe, study data, I look at each individual part for truth, accuracy, workability. Each sentence, or even half sentence, in it’s own space and time so to speak. I also look at the combination as a whole. Two sentences will have 3 meanings to convey. One for each and one for the combination of both. This is a generality of course. Sometimes it requires two or more sentences to make one datum and it could take several to complete one overall meaning. Sometimes just one. But you get the idea.
          This has become important, in my opinion, especially lately with discussions about Scn. and LRH, especially on Marty’s blog.
          Some say that everything he produced is tainted and worthless or even harmful due to his errors and/or his supposed evils. Some say much of his work was misconstrued/misused and it is all or most of it golden, Some say it is somewhere in between.
          I say look at each datum tor it’s truth, each principal for it’s wisdom. Sometimes every word. I think KSW should have said “we have much” or “some of the technology.” I have not found all of Lao Tsu’s work to be accurate, for me. I agree with much of Vinaire’s work and believe it to be of great value. But I examine each detail in it’s individuality. The source of information has little affect on my determination of usefulness, good or bad. Trust has little room in my quest for wisdom.
          I hope this gives some insight into my way of thinking and manner of work.
          Thanks, Mark

        • Chris Thompson  On December 6, 2013 at 8:53 AM

          This is all we ask of ourselves or anyone, simply be Mindful and strive for a more consistent view of the World.

          I think it can be distilled to two main points which are 1. Mindfulness, and 2. Assumptionlessness. (I made up that word but do not expect it to catch on since it is too unwieldy. )

        • vinaire  On December 6, 2013 at 1:32 PM

          Mindfulness is application of the Scientific Method to the Metaphysical Universe.

          .

        • MarkNR  On December 6, 2013 at 1:50 PM

          And that reminds me of one of the first confusions and ARC breaks I had with the CoS. In ’69’ I read Dianetics. At the very beginning of the book was an article on The Scientific Method by one of Ron’s favorite scientists, I forget which. Now it’s gone, along with an article by Ron at the end of the book on social Dianetics. Those articles are some of the primary reasons I began to study and practice Scn.
          ‘Someone’ decided to remove them.
          Mark

        • Chris Thompson  On December 6, 2013 at 2:43 PM

          Excellent!

      • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 10:53 AM

        Mark: Once there is occurrence, it seems that it is locked in, impossible to completely forget.

        Chris: This seems like a possibly fruitful vector to explore. There is a field the math guys call the wave function. Lately we seem to be trying to call it the Higgs Field. Bits seem to condense from this field such as electrons. Precise bits which are always identically the same bits. hahaha Possibly thought is condensed from this same field?

        • MarkNR  On December 5, 2013 at 11:45 AM

          I DON’T KNOW IF THIS IS RIGHT, but I have lately thought of the most basic, smallest part of physical existence as vibrations. Not something vibrating but a vibration existing as itself. The quality of the vibration determining it’s properties.
          When I was younger, I always thought of energy in a Newtonian sense as being the motion of something on some level or other. As I looked over some of the aspects of quantum physics, I gathered an idea of the unreality of matter. You and Vin have started me re-thinking these ideas. There are more ways to look at it.
          Mark

      • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 10:55 AM

        I am curious what the quantum (smallest bit) of thought is. Would this bit be the interface of physics and metaphysics? (I use metaphysics loosely) And am curious about intention. What is the quantum of intention? And Is there such quanta? Scientology for me is mostly religion that dabbles in philosophy of itself. Hubbard’s applied religious philosophy is macro in size while addressing what is in my opinion a quanta. It has not gotten a good result. Smart guys like you give Scientology credit for what you have worked out.

  • vinaire  On December 5, 2013 at 1:17 PM

    For me, the concept to understand is motion. What is motion in itself?

    • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 2:47 PM

      Consecutive appearance then disappearance of an object or idea in a different location relative to the previous location.

      I do not see motion as other than an illusion of movement. The change of location may be done by quantum Planck length jumps with the Planck second being the smallest meanigful length of time. I like 2nd transformer’s hypothesis of expansion and contraction and I like my own whirling sine wave of particles or waves changing polarity into and out of this part of the universe.

      • vinaire  On December 5, 2013 at 4:51 PM

        What is an electromagnetic wave? Is it creating space and time?

        • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 6:03 PM

          I am trying to rehab some high school chemistry having to do with electron shells also called principle energy levels. I am trying to understand how a free electron particle behaves, how a wave function behaves before collapsing, and whether electrons move when they change energy states from one electron shell to another about the nucleus of an atom. There may be something in this to teach me more about motion.

        • vinaire  On December 5, 2013 at 6:50 PM

          Motion seems to be appearance and disappearance and then reappearance.

  • vinaire  On December 5, 2013 at 1:55 PM

    In continuation with
    https://vinaire.me/2013/11/14/questioning-scientology-knowledge/#comment-15018

    .

    (1) There is multiple appearances and disappearances..
    (2) There is a sequence to these multiple appearances and disappearances.
    (3) We see these sequences as time.
    (4) The lines in a computer code provide such a sequence.
    (5) When that code is run, that sequence appears as time.

    • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 2:49 PM

      The journey of a thousand miles to my obscure ideas begins with a single step! Thank you!

  • vinaire  On December 5, 2013 at 8:25 PM

    From https://vinaire.me/2013/11/14/questioning-scientology-knowledge/#comment-14954

    > “Thoughts flooded. This was fun, interesting. This was also the beginning of beingness.”

    The comments on thoughts are also thoughts. The idea that beingness began is also a thought. In short, we simply have appearance of motion and motion is transforming into thoughts. The moment something appears it is being. Motion is being, thoughts are being, whatever is derived from thoughts is also being.

    This is just my feedback.

    .

  • vinaire  On December 5, 2013 at 8:28 PM

    Motion appears as waves, which then collapses into particles of thoughts.

    • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 11:50 PM

      What does the EKG measure? Waves or particles?

    • vinaire  On December 6, 2013 at 6:41 AM

      From Wikipedia:

      Electrocardiography (ECG or EKG from Greek: kardia, meaning heart) is a transthoracic (across the thorax or chest) interpretation of the electrical activity of the heart over a period of time, as detected by electrodes attached to the surface of the skin and recorded by a device external to the body. The recording produced by this noninvasive procedure is termed an electrocardiogram (also ECG or EKG).

      An ECG is used to measure the heart’s electrical conduction system. It picks up electrical impulses generated by the depolarization of cardiac tissue and translates into a waveform. The waveform is then used to measure the rate and regularity of heartbeats, as well as the size and position of the chambers, the presence of any damage to the heart, and the effects of drugs or devices used to regulate the heart, such as a pacemaker.

      Most ECGs are performed for diagnostic or research purposes on human hearts, but may also be performed on animals, usually for diagnosis of heart abnormalities or research.

      .

      • Chris Thompson  On December 6, 2013 at 9:11 AM

        Haha, yup. So whataya think? Is observing so particles?

        • vinaire  On December 6, 2013 at 5:50 PM

          It is picking up electrical impulses generated by the depolarization of cardiac tissue and translating into a waveform.

          What we see is an interpretation, as a waveform, of whatever is going on. It is picking up electrical impulses. Now we need to look up what an ELECTRICAL IMPULSE is!

          .

        • Chris Thompson  On December 6, 2013 at 5:52 PM

          Now we need to look up what an ELECTRICAL IMPULSE is!

          i’m with ya.

  • MarkNR  On December 6, 2013 at 11:35 AM

    This was a comment I posted on Marty’s blog during a discussion about South African natives, children, and psychotics. I think it applies to this discussion.

    Hello Marildi:
    I understand what you, and Ron, were trying to get across.
    My take?
    Circumstance, broadly speaking, is the primary driver of how much case and which areas of case are in restimulation and held in restimulation. How un-understandable and confusing one’s environ. is can affect how analytical or confused one is from moment to moment. As one handles and understands his environ. he comes uptone. As one grows out of childhood, he also gaines more discipline over his own case and becomes more analytical. A child, as with a psychotic, and many so called ‘natives’, has little discipline over his own case. In some environs. there is little ethics presence or incentive to impose self discipline.
    This applies broadly and there are more or fewer exceptions in different environs.
    Makes sense to me. I have seen this principal in action many times.
    In reading Ron, OR ANYONE ELSE, look for and duplicate the actual communication that is being conveyed. Looking for errors can blind one to the actual truths. A pot hole is easily repaired and shouldn’t close the entire highway.
    Mark

    • vinaire  On December 6, 2013 at 6:09 PM

      What is the boundary that separates environment from the person? This is something very interesting to examine.

      In my opinion, there is no such boundary. There is just a continuum.

      “Self-environment” is a system that is reacting continually to itself. It is dynamically adjusting to itself like the moon, which is continually adjusting its position while falling toward the earth. The system shall continue in its motion and shall not change in its behavior until the fixed potentials present in the system are dissolved.

      These fixed potentials can be in the environment, or in the self.

      .

  • vinaire  On December 6, 2013 at 1:48 PM

    In reference to:
    https://vinaire.me/2013/11/14/questioning-scientology-knowledge/#comment-15087

    .

    In my career as a word clearer, I realized that the procedure of word clearing promoted mindfulness. I have taken advantage of that characteristics to structure SUBJECT CLEARING in such a way that it promotes mindfulness when looking at a whole subject.

    .

    • vinaire  On December 6, 2013 at 1:52 PM

      I find that SUBJECT CLEARING provides a context in which definitions provided in a dictionary can themselves be revised toward greater consistency.

      This is specially the case with words in the subjects that make up Metaphysics.

      .

  • vinaire  On December 6, 2013 at 6:31 PM

    https://vinaire.me/2013/11/14/questioning-scientology-knowledge/#comment-15099

    > (Mark) … “And that reminds me of one of the first confusions and ARC breaks I had with the CoS. In ’69′ I read Dianetics. At the very beginning of the book was an article on The Scientific Method by one of Ron’s favorite scientists, I forget which. Now it’s gone, along with an article by Ron at the end of the book on social Dianetics. Those articles are some of the primary reasons I began to study and practice Scn. ‘Someone’ decided to remove them.”

    .
    Here you go. In this PDF version you can search whatever you want.

    DMSMH (1950 Version)

    .

    • MarkNR  On December 20, 2013 at 9:53 AM

      Vin:
      Here you go. In this PDF version you can search whatever you want.
      DMSMH (1950 Version)
      Mark:
      Thanks Vin. You are a golden resource.

  • Elizabeth Hamre  On December 17, 2013 at 12:22 AM

    ”’Now we need to look up what an ELECTRICAL IMPULSE is!”’ Are you looking for what causes that electrical impulse ???? 🙂
    Tell me first your reality on that subject… than we can go from there. 🙂

    .

  • vinaire  On December 17, 2013 at 7:02 AM

    I am off to New Zealand!

    • Chris Thompson  On December 17, 2013 at 8:47 AM

      Bon Voyage!

    • Elizabeth Hamre  On December 17, 2013 at 5:47 PM

      have a wonderful experience!

    • vinaire  On December 17, 2013 at 6:07 PM

      Thank you. The whole family of four is going. We are leaving on Friday. I am very much looking forward to it.

      • Elizabeth Hamre  On January 14, 2014 at 5:26 PM

        When are you coming back? miss you!

        • vinaire  On January 14, 2014 at 7:09 PM

          I came back from New Zealand on Jan 2, and I have been writing on my blog.

          You are following this blog, so you should get all posts and comments from this blog via email. If not then you can click on the STAT symbol on your blog, go to READER, and edit the parameters for my blog as follows:

          Send new posts by email: INSTANTLY
          Send new comments by email: ON

        • Elizabeth Hamre  On January 14, 2014 at 8:04 PM

          Thanks… good to hear from you and will see if what I did has corrected whatever.

  • Paul Gowan  On December 23, 2017 at 2:28 PM

    “All men have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely, to write freely of their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the opinions of others.” – L. Ron Hubbard

    “Personal integrity is knowing what you know. What you know is what you know and to have the courage to know and say what you have observed.”
    – L. Ron Hubbard

    “WHAT IS TRUE FOR YOU is what you have observed yourself and when you lose that you have lost EVERYTHING.”
    – L. Ron Hubbard

    “See what you see, not what someone tells you that you see.”
    – L. Ron Hubbard

    SAFEGUARDING TECHNOLOGY
    (excerpt for educational purposes)
    “People have following the route mixed up with “the right to have their own ideas”.
    Anyone is certainly entitled to have opinions and ideas and cognitions – so long as these do not bar the route out for self and others.”
    “Scientology is a workable system. It white tapes the road out of the labyrinth. If there were no white tapes marking the right tunnels, Man would just go on wandering around and around the way he has for eons, darting off on wrong roads, going in circles, ending up in the sticky dark, alone.”
    HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 FEBRUARY 1965 (Reissued on 7 June 1967, with the word “instructor” replaced by “supervisor”.)
    SAFEGUARDING TECHNOLOGY

    • vinaire  On December 23, 2017 at 3:59 PM

      Words are words. Actions are actions.

  • vinaire  On December 23, 2017 at 6:16 PM

    My comment on the following quote:

    “All men have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely, to write freely of their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the opinions of others.” – L. Ron Hubbard

    This is just a nice sounding quote emphasizing freedom to express oneself. But how many people are able to express themselves objectively, intelligently and sensibly? They chew up their freedom to express very soon by being subjective, unintelligent and offensive.

    And this applies to L. Ron Hubbard too.

%d bloggers like this: