Mindfulness & “I”

Reference: Scientology versus KHTK

From SCIENTOLOGY – A Handbook For Use (see page 35):

“There is one potential danger in narrative style: the pc may start narrating the incident “by memory?’. He will start mocking it up again! This is not what you want. To avoid it, you must explain very clearly to the pc what he ought to do. It’s like he was watching a TV screen which the auditor can’t see. So the pc must tell the auditor what he sees on the screen, i.e. what he sees now while the action is happening, not what he saw the last time through the incident. (What the pc “sees” is not limited to his visual impressions only, but refers to 54 further sense perceptics as well!) Only what he sees now is of importance. “I see a man. He walks into a room. From the left; there is a door. He stops by the table. It’s dark and cold. I am afraid. Etc.” This way the auditor can tell how the pc is moving from the level of action to the levels of emotion and postulate. He can see the shift of importance’s. And he can see how the incident is gradually erasing and thus recognize when to stop. When the pc starts talking “about” the incident instead of describing what he sees, he will be beginning to put something there where there is actually nothing. This is a problem common to all thetans. It is so much easier to acknowledge that there is something than to acknowledge that there is nothing! Failing to accept that there is nothing, the pc will either put something there or pull in some other engram or picture, just so that he has something to talk about. But: this will go along with bad indicators, such as glumness, slowness, unavailability of data, and on the meter it will produce a sticky needle and finally a high and very stuck TA. Developing an awareness of when a process is complete, when the EP has been reached, and so when to stop, is one of the vitally important points of learning to audit.”

Mindfulness is “seeing things as they are.” The above note describes how important mindfulness is in handling one’s case. When mindfulness is lacking, all kinds of complications arise. But we find that Hubbard’s research ended up dealing with the complications arising from lack of mindfulness. That is what makes the subject of Scientology so complex.

Instead of giving importance to mindfulness, Hubbard gave all his attention to boosting the capabilities of “I”. Hubbard never realized that “I” acts as a filter. A filter is something that a person is looking through. It colors one’s observations. It reduces mindfulness.

The more is the focus on “I” the more it becomes difficult to practice mindfulness.

The key error in Hubbard’s philosophy is found in the section “Identity versus Individuality” of Scientology 8-8008:

“The most common confusion on the part of a preclear is between himself as an identified object and his beingness. One’s beingness depends upon the amount of space which he can create or command, not upon his identification or any label. Identity as we know it in the MEST universe is much the same as identification, which is the lowest form of thought. When one is an object and is himself an effect, he believes that his ability to be cause is dependent upon his having a specific and finite identity. This is an aberration; as his beingness increases his individuality increases, and he quickly rises above the level of necessity for identity for he is himself self-sufficient with his own identity.

“The first question a preclear undergoing theta clearing asks himself is quite often: “How will I establish my identity if I have no body?” There are many remedies for this. The worst method of having an identity is having a body. As his individuality increases and his beingness expands—these two being almost synonymous—he is less and less concerned with this problem; that he is concerned with the problem tells the auditor where he is on the tone-scale.

“One of the control mechanisms which has been used on thetans is that when they rise in potential they are led to believe themselves one with the universe. This is distinctly untrue. Thetans are individuals. They do not as they rise up the scale, merge with other individualities. They have the power of becoming anything they wish while still retaining their own individuality. They are first and foremost themselves. There is evidently no Nirvana. It is the feeling that one will merge and lose his own individuality that restrains the thetan from attempting to remedy his lot. His merging with the rest of the universe would be his becoming matter. This is the ultimate in cohesiveness and the ultimate in affinity, and is at the lowest point of the tone-scale. One declines into a brotherhood with the universe. When he goes up scale, he becomes more and more an individual capable of creating and maintaining his own universe. In this wise (leading people to believe they had no individuality above that of MEST) the MEST universe cut out all competition.”

But the truth is that individuality is the core of identity or “I”. Scientology gets quick results in the beginning, because it practices a version of mindfulness, but those results become harder to get as one increasingly believes in the idea of thetan and identifies with it. This identification acts as a filter that interferes with mindfulness.

In Buddhism, the emphasis is on reducing the focus on “I”.  This makes mindfulness increasingly possible. Buddhism states,

“The Absolute Truth is that there is nothing absolute in the world, that everything is relative, conditioned and impermanent, and that there is no unchanging, everlasting, absolute substance like Self, Soul, or Ātman within or without.”

But Scientology declares in absolute terms that each person is an immortal (permanent) thetan. It focuses on achieving the supposedly fantastic abilities of a thetan. And, thus, Scientology proceeds in a direction opposite to Buddhism.

If we can only reverse the vector of Scientology and make it to parallel Buddhism, amazing and endless results are possible.

When we reverse the vector of Scientology to parallel Buddhism, we may refer to it as KHTK.


Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  • vinaire  On August 16, 2015 at 7:14 PM

    Hubbard says in the FUNDAMENTALS OF THOUGHT:

    “Scientology is that branch of psychology which treats of (embraces) human ability. It is an extension of DIANETICS which is in itself an extension of old-time faculty-psychology of 400 years ago. More acceptable and normal psychology such as that begun by St. Thomas Aquinas and extended by many later authors was, in 1879, interrupted severely by one Professor Wundt, a Marxist at Leipzig University in Germany. This man conceived that man was an animal without soul and based all of his work on the principle that there was no “psyche” (a Greek word meaning “spirit”).”


    Recently, I studied a brief on Professor Wundt from Wikipedia. What must have upset Hubbard is the following conclusion of Wundt.

    “The highest intelligence is a logical product of more primitive manifestations”

    This conclusion seems to invalidate the idea of thetan that is supposed to be the epitome of intelligence.


    • vinaire  On August 16, 2015 at 7:54 PM

      According to KHTK, an individual consists of physical and spiritual aspects.

      The physical aspects of an individual is called “body”. It consists of a matrix of atoms. It has a center of mass.

      The spiritual aspects of an individual is called “mind”. It consists of a matrix of thought atoms. It has a “center of thought,” which is the “I.”

      If the core of “I” is the thetan, then thetan would be a “matrix of thought” that has no kinks or inconsistencies.


  • vinaire  On August 16, 2015 at 7:53 PM

    Hubbard goes on to say,

    “Psychology, the study of the spirit (or mind) then came into the peculiar position of being “a study of the spirit which denied the spirit”. For the subsequent decades, Wundtian “psychology” was taught broadly throughout the world. It taught that man was an animal. It taught that man could not be bettered. It taught that intelligence never changed. This subject, Wundtian psychology, became standard, mainly because of the indifference or lack of knowledge of people in charge of universities.”


    This is Hubbard’s trademark propaganda. In my opinion, Wundt did not deny spirit. His conclusions simply denied the idea of “thetan,” which was Hubbard’s idea of spirit.

    Wundt did not teach that man is an animal. He simply saw man evolving from the simple state of animal to a more complex state,


    • vinaire  On August 16, 2015 at 7:57 PM

      According to KHTK, an animal psyche consists of a “matrix of percepts.”

      In humans, the percepts evolve into ideas. Therefore, a human psyche consists of a “matrix of ideas.”


  • vinaire  On August 17, 2015 at 10:30 AM

    Hubbard further says,

    “Scientology is actually a new but very basic psychology in the most exact meaning of the word. It can and does change behavior and intelligence, and it can and does assist people to study life. Unlike Wundtian pseudo-psychology, it has no political aspiration. Scientology is not teaching dialectical materialism under the heading of “psychology”.”


    History is a matrix of entities, where each entity itself is a matrix of simpler entities. History may be called a fractal of matrices in the relationship as described above. This may describe the basic conceptual structure of dialectical materialism.

    This conceptual structure of “fractal of matrices” takes the direction from simpler to complex. It denotes harmonics of relative complexity. It covers the whole range from spiritual to physical. Calling it “materialism” is a misnomer.

    It is referred to as “materialism” only to contrast it from “idealism”, or to contrast “actual” from “imaginary”. “Materialism” simply means that all entities from the simplest to complex actually exist. These entities present the harmonics from spiritual to physical.

    Hubbard was critical of Professor Wundt and of Dialectical Materialism because both contradicted his “stable datum” of an immortal thetan. Buddhism contradicted it too, and he derided “nirvana” as well.

    Now we see what underlies the derision of Hubbard for these subjects. He condemned anything that contradicted his attachment to the idea of an immortal thetan.



  • vinaire  On October 21, 2015 at 5:13 AM

    The difficulty that Scientology falls prey to is that it is so much easier to acknowledge that there is something than to acknowledge that there is nothing! When the pc starts talking “about” the incident instead of describing what he sees, he will be beginning to put something there where there is actually nothing.

    Yes, it does get interesting when a perishable self is examining itself. It assumes itself to be permanent. It has to because it is permanent to itself. It doesn’t know when it is not there.

    This is what Hubbard did, as so many others have done.


  • vinaire  On October 21, 2015 at 5:25 AM

    I think one should closely look at the concept of THETAN.

    The biggest boost to the ego is the thought that it permanent and indestructible.


%d bloggers like this: