An Analysis of Scientology Axiom #1

NOTE: The concepts of STATIC and KINETIC that are in consensus with The Vedas are expressed in the essay: Universe: Static to Kinetic

.

The very first Axiom of Scientology states:

AXIOM # 1: LIFE IS BASICALLY A STATIC.

Definition: a Life Static has no mass, no motion, no wavelength, no location in space or in time. It has the ability to postulate and to perceive.

.

However, the axiom uses the article “a” before Static. It further assigns the abilities “to postulate and to perceive” to Life Static. In THE PHOENIX LECTURES, Hubbard states:

“This is a peculiar and particular static, having these properties…”

When describing THETA-MEST THEORY in SCIENTOLOGY 8-8008, Hubbard states:

“In Scientology, the static is represented by the mathematical symbol theta; the kinetic is called MEST. Theta can be the property or beingness of any individual and is, for our purposes, considered to be individualistic for each individual.”

This is simply a restatement of Aristotle’s “Unmoved Mover” for God brought to the level of the individual.

It is raising the individual to the level of God. The inconsistency is that different individualities do not exist at the level of God. What exists is the awareness of universe as a single system.

.

The THETA-MEST THEORY states:

“Scientology is essentially a study of statics and kinetics. If anything, it is more exact than what are called the physical sciences, for it is dealing with a theoretical static and a theoretical kinetic which are at the opposite ends of a spectrum of all motion.”

It is consistent because the same fundamental characteristic of motion is considered at all points of a spectrum. Motion is the outward form of awareness as argued in Awareness and Motion. THETA (individuality) is as much an aspect of motion as MEST (matter, energy, space and time) is. Both THETA and MEST are manifestations of motion or life.

However, THETA-MEST THEORY also states:

“It is now considered that the origin of MEST lies with theta itself, and that MEST, as we know the physical universe, is a product of theta.”

This statement is inconsistent because it assumes that one end of a spectrum produces the other end. The fact is that all points of this spectrum represent motion (MEST) as the outward from of awareness (THETA). From one end of this spectrum to the other end only the complexity of awareness and motion (THETA-MEST) increases.

MEST is not produced by THETA as assumed in Scientology. Both THETA and MEST exist together as aspects of existence from one end of the spectrum to the other.

.

Any spectrum, or scale, is a manifestation as a whole. It must exist within the background of ‘no manifestation’. That ‘no manifestation’ cannot be THETA or Static as implied by Scientology Axiom #1. This is argued in Universe and Awareness.

We have the following from the Vedas

The Creation Hymn of Rig Veda

The Vedic Process for conceiving the background is: “Neti neti.”

This makes the background to be beyond what we can ever consider. The starting point is not individuality as implied in Scientology Axiom #1.

.

.

October 25, 2012 – 12:56 PM Categories: Scientology | Comments (107)

PSAT Diagnostics

These are PSAT Tests and Diagnostics:

01 PSAT Diagnostics 1

02 PSAT Diagnostics 2

03 PSAT Algebra

04 PSAT Equation

05 PSAT Inequalities

06 PSAT Geometry

07 PSAT Fractions

08 PSAT Percentage

09 PSAT Averages

10 PSAT Rates

11 PSAT Ratio

12 PSAT Work

13 PSAT Data Interpretation

14 PSAT Quantitative Comparison

15 PSAT Typical Test A

16 PSAT Typical Test B

17  PSAT Typical Test C

18 PSAT Typical Test D

19 PSAT Typical Test E

20 PSAT Typical Test F

21 PSAT Typical Test G

22 PSAT Typical Test H

23 PSAT Typical Test I

24 PSAT Typical Test J

October 24, 2012 – 9:03 PM Categories: Mathematics | Post a comment

An Analysis of Scientology Factor # 1 (old)

Please see A Course on Hubbard’s Factors

The very first Factor of Scientology states:

FACTOR # 1: BEFORE THE BEGINNING WAS A CAUSE AND THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF THE CAUSE WAS THE CREATION OF EFFECT.

.

Let’s examine this Factor.

  1. “Beginning” implies the beginning of any manifestation. This includes the universe as an overall manifestation.

  2. If Cause is postulated to be there before the beginning then the question arises, “Can Cause be there all by itself before its effect manifests itself?” An overall effect would be the creation of the universe. 

  3. If the answer is “yes” then Cause will be a manifestation on its own right, and the question then becomes, “What is the cause of the Cause?” This logic inevitably leads to an endless chain of causes, and the beginning keeps getting pushed back earlier and earlier.

  4. If the answer is “no” then the Cause must occur simultaneously with effect. “Cause-effect” would then be part of the same manifestation at the beginning. One may say that God and Universe must have appeared simultaneously as a pair.

  5. One tries to fix the dilemma in (3) by postulating “Uncaused cause.” But this postulate appears to be self-contradictory and simply a device of convenience.

  6. Thus, CAUSE seems to be part of the created considerations. This seems to be consistent with the idea that TIME itself would start at the beginning.

  7. Thus, there would be no such thing as “before the beginning.”

  8. Thus, CAUSE is part of a system of interdependent considerations. It is part of the creation like anything else. There is no linear chain of considerations as implied by the factor above.

  9. The idea “before the beginning” would then be a projection that is created after the fact of beginning. Thus, the idea of God as the Creator would appear after the fact of Creation.

  10. The assumption that CAUSE, a consideration in itself, can be separated from, and can be extended beyond, the system of considerations it generates, seems to be the basic inconsistency.

.

Thus, it appears that beginning is simply there. We do not know how the beginning of creation comes to be. We may try to explain or justify it with arbitrary postulation, but the fact remains that we do not really know the answer.

This conclusion is uncomfortable to face. That is why we get postulates like “Uncaused cause,” “God as the Creator,” and Scientology Factor #1.

To see how the inconsistency in Factor #1 may be addressed please see: KHTK Axiom Zero

.

October 23, 2012 – 6:35 AM Categories: Uncategorized | Comments (9)

KHTK Looking: An Overview

References:

  1. Memory & Recall
  2. What is Mindfulness?
  3. The 12 Aspects of Mindfulness
  4. KHTK Exercises based on Buddhism

The most accurate knowledge is made up of the perceptions obtained within a span of last 200 – 500 milliseconds. [Reference: the Wikipedia article on Memory.]

All other knowledge is extrapolated from one’s experiences, information, hypotheses, theories, principles, axioms, and self. Such extrapolations are subject to filtration through inconsistencies as follows:

Inconsistencies in

  1. Perceptions are “Engrams”

  2. Experiences are “Unwanted feelings & emotions”

  3. Information are “Indoctrination”

  4. Hypotheses are “Beliefs”

  5. Theories are “Doctrines”

  6. Principles are “Fixed ideas”

  7. Axioms are “Fixed viewpoints”

  8. Self are “Fixed identity”

Such inconsistencies add inaccuracies to extrapolated knowledge.

.

It is difficult to perceive inconsistencies when justifications are present. Justifications are made up of expectations, presumptions and speculations.

KHTK looking helps one perceive inconsistencies by use of mindfulness (see references above). The KHTK exercises help one learn to apply mindfulness  and reduce filters on a gradient.

Fixation of self (shame, blame, egotism. etc.) is a distraction that provides a wonderful array of justifications. A viewpoint is basically a subset of self. Attempts to understand another’s viewpoint is just another form of this fixation.

Instead of focusing on self or on viewpoint, if one focuses on dissolving inconsistencies, then life situations resolve must more swiftly and new situations are prevented from developing.

.

Thus, to make real progress in life:

  1. Use mindfulness till it becomes effortless as second nature.

  2. Recognize inconsistencies as they arise. Do not ignore them.

  3. Immediately look at the inconsistency more closely.

  4. Consistencies can be drawn upon quite easily as needed in Information Age of today.

  5. Simply track down the inconsistency and look at it closely until it dissolves.

  6. When the inconsistency is dissolved, then that’s it. Let it go.

  7. Focus on the next inconsistency as it arises.

Situations resolve much more swiftly in a group where everybody is applying mindfulness and focusing on dissolving inconsistencies as they arise.

.

Glossary

Justification

  1. To justify is to present reason or excuse for something done.
  2. Scientology) “explaining away the most flagrant wrongnesses. Most explanations of conduct, no matter how far-fetched, seem perfectly right to the person making them since he or she is only asserting self-rightness and other-wrongness.”

.

October 22, 2012 – 7:28 AM Categories: KHTK | Post a comment

Identity versus Individuality

Individuality identifies a person for who he is. It differentiates him from another person. There cannot be individuality without identity. Layers of identity may be taken off, but what is left is still something that identifies a person.

In the Paper on Hinduism Swami Vivekananda stated:

So far all the Hindus are agreed. This is the common religion of all the sects of India; but, then, perfection is absolute, and the absolute cannot be two or three. It cannot have any qualities. It cannot be an individual. And so when a soul becomes perfect and absolute, it must become one with Brahman, and it would only realise the Lord as the perfection, the reality, of its own nature and existence, the existence absolute, knowledge absolute, and bliss absolute. We have often and often read this called the losing of individuality and becoming a stock or a stone.
“He jests at scars that never felt a wound.”
I tell you it is nothing of the kind. If it is happiness to enjoy the consciousness of this small body, it must be greater happiness to enjoy the consciousness of two bodies, the measure of happiness increasing with the consciousness of an increasing number of bodies, the aim, the ultimate of happiness being reached when it would become a universal consciousness.

In other words, perfection transcends self. It has to be the same all over. It cannot have boundary of separation defining it as some quality or individuality. Attaining perfection would then mean losing individuality or self.

Is losing individuality the same as becoming one with matter as thought by those who worship individuality? No, it is nothing of the kind. Individual happiness is to enjoy the consciousness of a small body. Perfection is to enjoy the universal consciousness.

.

It is interesting to note that Scientology is a religion that worships individuality. Hubbard wrote in SCN 8-8008: Identity versus Individuality:

Identity versus Individuality
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.

Hubbard threw a curve by describing individuality as something good and identity as something bad. He derided the goal of Nirvana in Buddhism, which is to extinguish self or individuality.

Being a fundamental datum of Scientology, this worship of individuality provides a filter that distorts the subject of Scientology. Even though, Scientology contains some brilliant new technology to address the subject of the mind, it ends up producing the following as its valuable final product:

“A scientologist is a person with attention fixed on himself or herself, or on one’s individuality in general.”

.

[Added on December 11, 2013, revised March 20, 2015]:

Individuality is not something different from identity.
Individuality is the core of identity.
Creation of a unit is creation of a boundary.
Anything that creates a unit is part of that unit.
If thetan is a unit, then it has a boundary.
That boundary marks an identity.

.

October 21, 2012 – 8:31 AM Categories: Scientology | Comments (16)