Question for Scientology “Purists”

Tom_Cruise

Here is a question I have for Scientology “purists” that I put on JIM ROSS MESKIMEN’S BLOG

.

I saw this article on Facebook, and that is why I am here. I like Scientology too because I have been helped by it, but there are also aspects of Scientology that I don’t like, and which I try to understand. I hope you wouldn’t mind if I take up one of those aspects for discussion on your blog.

My earlier experiences in Scientology were wonderful; so much so that I documented them in My Introduction to America. Those early experiences gave me hope that I could get a grass-roots movement in education going in my country (India), through which people could improve themselves. The ancient movement of “meditation” had lost its steam long ago. But auditing as “directed meditation” could put life back in it.

But then I saw Scientology moving away from its early promise of creating a grass-roots movement in the field. I saw it becoming very sensitive to criticism even if that criticism were valid. I saw it declaring people as squirrels and suppressive if they thought on their own to make Scientology principles easier to apply at the grass-roots level. I saw an obsessive control to keep the technology out of general reach under the pretext of keeping it “pure.”

As we see in the field of science that the purity of knowledge would always be aspired for and any corruption of knowledge would just wash away over time. All one has to do is to make those basic principles easier to understand and apply. And that is what I have gone back to doing on my blog, which may not be appreciated by the “purists.”

Should or should not the Scientology research be continued by others, after Hubbard’s passing away? Shouldn’t the principles discovered by Hubbard be made easier to be applied at the grass-roots level?

.

PS: It was 1969 when I first came across Dianetics and Scientology, and dreamed of a grass-roots movement going in India. But, today, my country is the United States of America. It is where I live. And now I dream of a grass-roots movement in education started throughout the world.

I hope to accomplish that dream with the help of KHTK (Knowing How To Know), which is inspired in part by Scientology.

.

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Comments

  • MarkNR  On November 29, 2013 at 12:01 PM

    I like Scn. because it is a structured, methodical and broadly workable system of spiritual improvement. It is the largest single body of spiritual knowledge in existence.
    I like the Tao because it thoroughly explains and gives many examples of a very basic and important principal of existence.
    I like KHTK because of the confidence and value it places in the individuals basic ability to know what is right, given the chance, and to self inspect and unravel ones own confusions.
    I like Ken Oggers Super Scio because he was the first to recognize the value of Hubbards vast work, recognize the errors in such and develop a methodical, workable alternative from a mindful viewpoint.
    I like all forms of spiritual wisdom which produce a demonstrable result. Do, I believe, is the most underrated point in Be Do Have.
    Mark

  • vinaire  On November 29, 2013 at 12:34 PM

    To me all knowledge should be looked upon as a big pool, and all inconsistencies present in it should be cleaned up one by one.

    .

  • 2ndxmr  On November 29, 2013 at 1:28 PM

    Nice letter, Vinay. Poignant.

    Scientology got itself into a dichotomy of rigid flexibility with the advent of KSW1.

    KSW1 said “we have the tech, it’s all worked out, don’t alter it, just do it” and “you’re damned if you alter it”. All very rigid.

    Then, of course, it changed and changed. It flexed and yesterday’s standard tech was today’s suppressive act.

    If only, if only… If only LRH had said something like “I make the rules in my sandbox and I’ll change them whenever I want. If you don’t like them you can’t play here. But if you make a nice castle outside the box I might copy it.

    Ego. A deadly sin? More metaphorically correct it may definitely be a double edged knife on which one is very likely to cut oneself every time it is used.

    I’m all for the open bowl of knowledge from which anyone can drink and yet even that bowl of knowledge morphs into another double-edged knife who’s cut depends on intent.

    And that brings us around the circle to the ethics questions and dilemmas on the broadcasting of knowledge.

    And the snake begins eating his tail. Soon to be dead even if he doesn’t choke on a mélange of metaphors first. 😉

    • Chris Thompson  On November 30, 2013 at 9:48 AM

      2X: And the snake begins eating his tail. Soon to be dead even if he doesn’t choke on a mélange of metaphors first. 😉

      Ct: Wonderful post. It has been occurring to me to wonder at the styles and types of intelligences. It seems there are as many dimensions to intelligence and these manifest in the many species of plant and animal life that we see and what else?

      I wonder at the egotism of mankind and wonder whether this dimension is exclusive to man? And do other plants and animals wonder about their existence? It is interesting to me that the greatest understanding that I’ve acquired about my existence is through metaphor. Man like his fellow primates may possess opposable thumbs but it doesn’t seem to me that this unique appendage is required for the creation of metaphors.

      • 2ndxmr  On November 30, 2013 at 5:10 PM

        Ct:”It is interesting to me that the greatest understanding that I’ve acquired about my existence is through metaphor.”

        Perhaps metaphors are just word-art where 25, or less, paint the picture of 1000.

    • vinaire  On November 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM

      Could snake eating its tail be interpreted as the snake finally understanding and “as-ising” itself?

      There is no knowledge. There are only inconsistencies.

      .

  • Phil Pipieri  On November 29, 2013 at 5:29 PM

    Scientology and Dianetics will help you create more “mind” if you suspect it or not. Though tried and tested modes of meditations require a submission of will at first, it ultimately decimates the obsessive mind later and opens the door to planes of permanent higher awareness.. I suggest you find the wherewithal to Accomplish that first, then come back and see if what you propose is worthwhile. Don’t waste you time while here, there are far too many distractions!

    • 2ndxmr  On November 29, 2013 at 11:42 PM

      PP:”Though tried and tested modes of meditations require a submission of will at first,…”

      As an auditor I certainly understand this concept as it applies to an auditing process or auditing in general.

      It certainly does NOT apply to an arrogant think that submission is necessary to the merest whim of the organization. That sort of think is, however, the sorry state of affairs that is pushed down from the very, very top.

  • vinaire  On November 29, 2013 at 6:10 PM

    I strongly feel that workable knowledge should be brought to the grass-roots level for the benefit of all.

    .

    • vinaire  On November 29, 2013 at 6:12 PM

      Currently, Scientology falls far short of that ideal scene. But I am sure KHTK can accomplish that ideal scene.

      .

  • vinaire  On November 30, 2013 at 9:37 AM

    It was 1969 when I first came across Dianetics and Scientology, and dreamed of a grass-roots movement going in India. But, today, my country is the United States of America. It is where I live. And now I dream of a grass-roots movement in education started throughout the world.

    I hope to accomplish that dream through KHTK (Knowing How To Know).

    .

  • vinaire  On December 1, 2013 at 6:49 AM

    Hubbard stated in HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 FEBRUARY 1965, Keeping Scientology Working Series 1:

    “Getting the correct technology applied consists of:
    One: Having the correct technology.
    Two: Knowing the technology.

    One above has been done.
    Two has been achieved by many.
    …”

    This is either arrogant or Hubbard is referring to a very narrow segment of technology, which doesn’t even cover whole of Scientology.

    To think that Scientology has the complete answer to man’s travails is a far cry from reality. To say that Scientology is the only answer to man’s travails is adding insult to injury.

    I would agree that Scientology added the vital element of “directed meditation” to the old tech of meditation, but that is how far it goes.

    .

    .

  • vinaire  On December 5, 2013 at 8:42 AM

    My comment on JIM ROSS MESKIMEN’S BLOG is still awaiting moderation.

    It is a pity that some people are so afraid of critical thinking and mindful discussions.

    .

    • Chris Thompson  On December 5, 2013 at 8:54 AM

      Yes, well this is a pretty common reaction. Seeking to find some truth is a very different path than trying to understand what truth is.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: