does as-ising actually work?

[Mimsey Borogrove]

So, Mayo just wanted them to have something like "the clear cognition" = "I just made up this stuff in my own mind". :confused2:

And if they never get that cog then they just go down a path of more and more delusion.
(Eventually, a person might strip off their clothing and walk down a street naked.)

Mayo was the top tech guy at one point, and the clear cog is a rather specific cognition - coming to realize you are mocking up the bank.

This hits into a rather basic concept which Scientology tech balances on - the idea that you can as-is something.

Hubbard posits if you look at something exactly ( and possibly creating an exact duplicate of it in the exact same space ) it will vanish. All auditing to some extent depends on that principal.

I am certain that there is a certain amount of de-sensitizing of incidents etc by viewing them, but total erasure?

See, that is perhaps why clear is an unobtainable state - one realizes he is creating the bank, but is that realization sufficient to result in the cessation of creation of the bank, or the erasure of the bank?

And what happens when it doesn't happen? We waltz off into the OT levels, and we are suddenly composite beings, and yes, you are clear - however, the entire BT bank is impeding your progress, and returned abilities. Yet, when all the BT's have been given their pink slips, we still find OTs that have not had a resurgence of their state of clear.

Hence my question - does as-ising actually work?

Mimsey

 

[programmer_guy]

Hubbard posits if you look at something exactly ( and possible creating a duplicate of it in the exact same space ) it will vanish.

If a person "sees" that their garage door has vanished BUT everyone else still sees the garage door THEN what happened?
I would say this is delusion... mental illness.

See, that is perhaps why clear is an unobtainable state - one realizes he is creating the bank, but is that realization sufficient to result in the cessation of creation of the bank, or the erasure of the bank?
Mimsey

There is no "bank" as Hubbard described it. But there is subconscious brain activity all of the time.


Thanks for the conversation.
Now, it's your turn. Thoughts?

 

[Leon-2]

Second part first - having the so called "clear cog" of "I'm mocking it all up" usually does not as-is the entire bank. It only shifts the guy out from being the effect of it in the present. It shifts him out quite thoroughly, let's not minimize that. But I don't believer for a moment that it is permanently irretrievably gone.

First part - as-ising something only works in your own universe. So you can mock something up, forget that it is a daydream and enjoy the creation for a while. The moment you recognize your authorship of it the illusion vanishes and is gone. That, exactly, is as-ising something.

Can it apply to physical objects? Only if you yourself created them. If you didn't, or if you are uncertain of it, then No.

Your "own universe" at present is the self created universe inside your head space. When that head space is big enough to match the universe's space and you recognize your creation of it, then you can as-is it.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

..

Second part first - having the so called "clear cog" of "I'm mocking it all up" usually does not as-is the entire bank. It only shifts the guy out from being the effect of it in the present. It shifts him out quite thoroughly, let's not minimize that. But I don't believer for a moment that it is permanently irretrievably gone.

First part - as-ising something only works in your own universe. So you can mock something up, forget that it is a daydream and enjoy the creation for a while. The moment you recognize your authorship of it the illusion vanishes and is gone. That, exactly, is as-ising something.

Can it apply to physical objects? Only if you yourself created them. If you didn't, or if you are uncertain of it, then No.

Your "own universe" at present is the self created universe inside your head space. When that head space is big enough to match the universe's space and you recognize your creation of it, then you can as-is it.

Were you ever slightly concerned that you might be mocking it all up (that Scientology has clearing and OT technology)?

Do you think Scientology "technology" did more good or harm in the world? All I see is a landscape fairly littered with victims of Hubbard as far as the eye can see. Yeah, I know there are some "wins", but I don't judge life by "wins" because even sociopaths, mass murderers and suicide cults have "wins" just before they dose their children with cyanide and then kill themselves.

I just find it a better idea to look for "wins" in another direction than a pathological liar and sadistic con man like Hubbard. Why anyone still thinks Hubbard's tech "works" (after 99% of Scientologists who ever tried the "bridge" have blown and fled to safety) is a mystery extraordinaire.

 

[Dulloldfart]

I am certain that there is a certain amount of de-sensitizing of incidents etc by viewing them, but total erasure?

Proving total erasure is proving a negative: can't be done. What can possibly be done is desensitising something so that it doesn't bother one any more: a "good enough" result. Is it permanently fixed? Impossible to say. But realistically, good enough is, well, good enough.

Paul

 

[strativarius]

Mayo was the top tech guy at one point, and the clear cog is a rather specific cognition - coming to realize you are mocking up the bank.

This hits into a rather basic concept which Scientology tech balances on - the idea that you can as-is something.

Hubbard posits if you look at something exactly ( and possibly creating an exact duplicate of it in the exact same space ) it will vanish. All auditing to some extent depends on that principal.

Perhaps that is why auditing is so ineffective. And by the way, it's 'principle' not 'principal'.

I am certain that there is a certain amount of de-sensitizing of incidents etc by viewing them, but total erasure?

You are certain? From where do you obtain the certainty that an 'incident' has been 'de-sensitised'? This can only be subjective and cannot be measured in any scientific way.

See, that is perhaps why clear is an unobtainable state - one realizes he is creating the bank, but is that realization sufficient to result in the cessation of creation of the bank, or the erasure of the bank?

No. Clear is an unobtainable state because there is no such thing as 'the R6 bank' as posited by scientology in the first place.

Hence my question - does as-ising actually work?

No.

 

[RogerB]

Good questions, Mims . . .

Like everything presented by Hubbs in Dianetics and Scientology, he bullshitted us by misrepresenting and mis-stating what actually is going on in the matters he spouted on.

As-issing and vanishment? Heh, if it had “vanished,” you would have no remnant of it such as the memory of what you addressed . . . hands up- anyone who so vanished whatever it was you “ran” and as-issed, that you now have no knowledge or memory of it.

Alan Walter did a better and more honest job in this matter. He correctly pointed out, and defined, that the “charge” you are addressing in any “incident” or area of your past experience is simply your spiritual Life-Force that has accumulated (charge is actually accumulated energy, and that is also the physics definition of it) and out of your control . . . and is thus negative to you.

By “running it” you regain your knowledge, control and responsibility in the area such that it (the incident or whatever) is no longer unknown to you nor out of your control.

As to the clear cog??? Heh, that too is misrepresented by the cult. In actuality, the real cog to have that matters is that one is at cause over the matter or in the area or incident . . . that is, you are no longer affected by it or effect of it. And that is a state of being that can be attained and lived with . . . but the person needs to understand that that is what they have recovered or attained and, understanding that, they can proceed on to handle other higher levels of spiritual awareness, powers and abilities . . .

And this is why it is bullshit to be telling folks that when they are “clear” they can’t run any more “incidents” and such. The fact is, once you’ve come to the realization that you’re at cause over the “mental image pictures” in your mind you can safely go anywhere in your past, present or future and deal with what is to be dealt with, with the correct and workable tech (which Scientology is NOT).

But then, “mental image pictures” in your mind, is more bullshit by Hubbard: this because what is actually being addressed and handled is/are impressions on and turbulence of your spiritual presence . . . that is, what the person should be recognizing is that they cleaning themselves up, not their putative “mind.” You as a spiritual Being/presence have had your existence impressed upon and screwed up. Your Life-Force has been screwed with . . . correct tech addresses this at a spiritual level. That is, YOU, cleaning yourself up and undoing the upsets.

Indeed, it is coincidental that you post this right now, Mimsey, as I just last night posted a video lecture by Alan very much on this subject at the Knowledgism Practice Group. Here:
http://knowledgism-practice-group.org

Title is: PERMEATION: THE MOST IMPORTANT ABILITY IN THE UNIVERSE

And part of the tech referenced by Alan is the bulletin posted by my co-host at the forum:
The lecture is delightful by the way. Attached is Responsibility Series 13 (BEING A SOURCE AND CAUSE OVER YOUR LIFE AND ENVIRONMENT) referenced in the tape.

So, Mims, do you think we have done a good enough job here of waving red flags at this lot to make the bulls charge??

R

 

[I told you I was trouble]

Snipped tacky ad for Knowledgeism.

So, Mims, do you think we have done a good enough job here of waving red flags at this lot to make the bulls charge??

R

Nah ... but (once again) you've confirmed to "this lot" the real reason you're still skulking around here ...

 

[George Layton]

"See, that is perhaps why clear is an unobtainable state - one realizes he is creating the bank, but is that realization sufficient to result in the cessation of creation of the bank, or the erasure of the bank?"

So your clear as long as you don't start trying to be clear?

 

[George Layton]

Good questions, Mims . . .

Like everything presented by Hubbs in Dianetics and Scientology, he bullshitted us by misrepresenting and mis-stating what actually is going on in the matters he spouted on.

As-issing and vanishment? Heh, if it had “vanished,” you would have no remnant of it such as the memory of what you addressed . . . hands up- anyone who so vanished whatever it was you “ran” and as-issed, that you now have no knowledge or memory of it.

Alan Walter did a better and more honest job in this matter. He correctly pointed out, and defined, that the “charge” you are addressing in any “incident” or area of your past experience is simply your spiritual Life-Force that has accumulated (charge is actually accumulated energy, and that is also the physics definition of it) and out of your control . . . and is thus negative to you.

By “running it” you regain your knowledge, control and responsibility in the area such that it (the incident or whatever) is no longer unknown to you nor out of your control.

As to the clear cog??? Heh, that too is misrepresented by the cult. In actuality, the real cog to have that matters is that one is at cause over the matter or in the area or incident . . . that is, you are no longer affected by it or effect of it. And that is a state of being that can be attained and lived with . . . but the person needs to understand that that is what they have recovered or attained and, understanding that, they can proceed on to handle other higher levels of spiritual awareness, powers and abilities . . .

And this is why it is bullshit to be telling folks that when they are “clear” they can’t run any more “incidents” and such. The fact is, once you’ve come to the realization that you’re at cause over the “mental image pictures” in your mind you can safely go anywhere in your past, present or future and deal with what is to be dealt with, with the correct and workable tech (which Scientology is NOT).

But then, “mental image pictures” in your mind, is more bullshit by Hubbard: this because what is actually being addressed and handled is/are impressions on and turbulence of your spiritual presence . . . that is, what the person should be recognizing is that they cleaning themselves up, not their putative “mind.” You as a spiritual Being/presence have had your existence impressed upon and screwed up. Your Life-Force has been screwed with . . . correct tech addresses this at a spiritual level. That is, YOU, cleaning yourself up and undoing the upsets.

Indeed, it is coincidental that you post this right now, Mimsey, as I just last night posted a video lecture by Alan very much on this subject at the Knowledgism Practice Group. Here:
http://knowledgism-practice-group.org

Title is: PERMEATION: THE MOST IMPORTANT ABILITY IN THE UNIVERSE

And part of the tech referenced by Alan is the bulletin posted by my co-host at the forum:
The lecture is delightful by the way. Attached is Responsibility Series 13 (BEING A SOURCE AND CAUSE OVER YOUR LIFE AND ENVIRONMENT) referenced in the tape.

So, Mims, do you think we have done a good enough job here of waving red flags at this lot to make the bulls charge??

R

Be mindful of your imagination to take the sickness out of your spiritualization.

Do they charge physical money for that, I mean besides what it costs you in sanity?

 

[Bill]

Hence my question - does as-ising actually work?

Mimsey

Nope.

And, since that forms the basis of almost all of Scientology, that's why Scientology does not work.

 

[Gizmo]

Mayo was the top tech guy at one point, and the clear cog is a rather specific cognition - coming to realize you are mocking up the bank.

This hits into a rather basic concept which Scientology tech balances on - the idea that you can as-is something.

Hubbard posits if you look at something exactly ( and possibly creating an exact duplicate of it in the exact same space ) it will vanish. All auditing to some extent depends on that principal.

I am certain that there is a certain amount of de-sensitizing of incidents etc by viewing them, but total erasure?

See, that is perhaps why clear is an unobtainable state - one realizes he is creating the bank, but is that realization sufficient to result in the cessation of creation of the bank, or the erasure of the bank?

And what happens when it doesn't happen? We waltz off into the OT levels, and we are suddenly composite beings, and yes, you are clear - however, the entire BT bank is impeding your progress, and returned abilities. Yet, when all the BT's have been given their pink slips, we still find OTs that have not had a resurgence of their state of clear.

Hence my question - does as-ising actually work?

Mimsey

" . . .does as-ising actually work " ?

NO ! Just like the rest of all the cult sells : NO.

There is NO clear.


There is NO OT.

There is NO " as-ising ".

For those who still believe in " as - ising " - please provide just ONE example in the real world. Step up & " as-is " something other than something that only exists in your own delusion - use something we call all see.

How about " as- ising " Big Blue.

Too big a bite ? " as -is " AOLA.

Still too big ?

How 'bout one of those junker cars in parking lot at LA org.

Somebody could make a fortune goin around " as-ising " garbage dumps, or forest fires !

Why aren't those who can " as-is " running around " as-ising " all the bad shit off this planet ?

Could be because they can't " as -is " a damn thing.

'Jus sayin

 

[lotus]

..



I just find it a better idea to look for "wins" in another direction than a pathological liar and sadistic con man like Hubbard. Why anyone still thinks Hubbard's tech "works" (after 99% of Scientologists who ever tried the "bridge" have blown and fled to safety) is a mystery extraordinaire.

An unprecedented order of magnitude mystery samiche
There is not answer found yet :confused2:

 

[lotus]

Lest suppose the $cientology ''as-isness'' leading to $cientology ''cognitions'' would refers to
Seing thing as they are (purely) and get a sudden realization about that...

Such seing things as they are is not possible (almost impossible) with $cientology processing and training.

Why ???? the processing is a body of work designed for the PC/Clear\Oatie to see thing that don't exist or had not existed and get a realizations about such fabulation...Thus the realization is not a realizations about seeing the reality...its a climax moment about integrate a fabulation, to then make sudden sens of it to explain life and other things...

How adopting the perceptions, views, fabulations, fantasies, psychosis of a psychotic can lead one to ''as-is'' and cognite the pseudo ''what is...'' ????
You are only transfered his attempt (to make his hallucinations becoming an existing world,) your attempt to make it yours...and thus, your mesmerized ego-mind believe you have created universes ( narcissism..idées de grandeur...)

At this point..what you need..is to do some real meditation..see the true nature of the mind, and the Self...and get out of this megalomaniac ego mind...and realize that in fact...you created almost nothing..and you are not more important neither more powerful that a ant...

An ant..know what it has to do and is working a constructive manner to help the ant society to survive...an Ant doesn't hink it is the cneter of universe neither it created it...

Anyone who engages in a true path of meditation see his\her mind..not LRHs mind...
A gardner is in pt...a farmer as-is day long...a kid cognite day long...while experiencing real life...

:confused2:

 

[programmer_guy]

<snip>
I am certain that there is a certain amount of de-sensitizing of incidents etc by viewing them, but total erasure?
<snip>

I think that you are assuming that ALL memories, stored in the brain, are always accessible to the pre-frontal cortex.

 

[JustSheila]

I think that you are assuming that ALL memories, stored in the brain, are always accessible to the pre-frontal cortex.

Good one. Children don't even form permanent memories until at least the age of 2, more commonly around age 3. Their brains do not support permanent memories, it's a proven fact, they're not that developed yet. That's why peek-a-boo can actually be upsetting to a child who is too young. Memory? Now mom's here, now she's GONE! (But I just stepped away for a minute!)

Then there are actual unconscious times that are NOT accessible to the pre-frontal cortex. Ever. It's a false presumption. I know of 4-5 periods in my life when I was unconscious and could never, ever contact those times in session or out. They didn't even read. But those times were documented and witnessed, I was definitely unconscious.

Actually, it was a big disappointment to me to find they just didn't have 'charge' so weren't locatable. Never did remember. It never mattered, either. Why should it?

 

[Mimsey Borogrove]

Good one. Children don't even form permanent memories until at least the age of 2, more commonly around age 3. Their brains do not support permanent memories, it's a proven fact, they're not that developed yet. That's why peek-a-boo can actually be upsetting to a child who is too young. Memory? Now mom's here, now she's GONE! (But I just stepped away for a minute!)

snip

So, a persons life starts out in a senile /Alzheimer's phase as he/ she ages, moves into sentience and than reverts back to senility / Alzheimer's? Makes sense to me! Mimsey

 

[programmer_guy]

Good one. Children don't even form permanent memories until at least the age of 2, more commonly around age 3. Their brains do not support permanent memories, it's a proven fact, they're not that developed yet. That's why peek-a-boo can actually be upsetting to a child who is too young. Memory? Now mom's here, now she's GONE! (But I just stepped away for a minute!)

Then there are actual unconscious times that are NOT accessible to the pre-frontal cortex. Ever. It's a false presumption. I know of 4-5 periods in my life when I was unconscious and could never, ever contact those times in session or out. They didn't even read. But those times were documented and witnessed, I was definitely unconscious.

Actually, it was a big disappointment to me to find they just didn't have 'charge' so weren't locatable. Never did remember. It never mattered, either. Why should it?

So, I guess that it is safe to assume that you were never Queen Anne of Great Britain in the 17th century?

 

[Mimsey Borogrove]

Dear Just Sheila didn't your post say how kids had no memory? Isn't that a sign of Alzheimer's in adults? So, it struck me as funny, how we progress from having no memory to having memory, and when we get old, to not having it. Mimsey

 

[Leon-2]

Good one. Children don't even form permanent memories until at least the age of 2, more commonly around age 3. Their brains do not support permanent memories, it's a proven fact, they're not that developed yet. That's why peek-a-boo can actually be upsetting to a child who is too young. Memory? Now mom's here, now she's GONE! (But I just stepped away for a minute!)

Then there are actual unconscious times that are NOT accessible to the pre-frontal cortex. Ever. It's a false presumption. I know of 4-5 periods in my life when I was unconscious and could never, ever contact those times in session or out. They didn't even read. But those times were documented and witnessed, I was definitely unconscious.

Actually, it was a big disappointment to me to find they just didn't have 'charge' so weren't locatable. Never did remember. It never mattered, either. Why should it?

This ^^^^^^^^^ is garbage.