From Miss X - About Annie Broeker

[Vinaire]

Jesus Vinay. Could you get any more patronising if you tried?!

Are you criticizing my evil purpose?

.

 

[lionheart]

What underlies the allergy to certain terminology?

.

I can slip into Scientologese, quite happily, thanks for your concern.

But why bother? English is a perfectly good language. Scientologese is a cult-trap mechanism to make the mundane esoteric and special and unique to the cult. It re-inforces the cult lie that the cult is the only solution.

You see, you pulled that Scn trick again didn't you? You did the Scn trick with your question of trying to invalidate and introvert someone by implying "case".

You are a naughty Scientologist! :wink2:

Try talking for a week on here without using a single Scn word - see what happens. You have absolutely nothing to lose by trying it.

Your Friend Dennis Erlich used to advise this.

Instead of using the word as-is, try using "letting go". See if you can spot yourself letting go of something. Releasing is normal and natural. Words like as-ising make it seem special and only available through Scn.

Letting go is a god-given gift, treat yourself to the present. (literally).

 

[lionheart]

Ah. I agree with much of what you say. But I have to take exception to that one, especially for the folks on this forum. It seems that most here have let go of being a member of the CoS (even if, for some of us, not the subject of Scn itself). But have we let go of not being one? Many of us are being SOOOooooo right about that!!!!

Nick

Can't argue with that idea. Just thought the phrase was a little complicated and would take the person out-of-session whiile they figured out the logic of the phrase. It's no big deal.

How about:

Could you allow yourself to not be a member of the CofS?
Could you allow yourself to be a member of the CofS?

Would that achieve what you suggest?

Due to the apparent duality of the lie called life, polarities can always be found and run. A bracket like the above will as-is (one for Vinaire there! :wink2: ) the dualistic nature of our CofS careers and allow us to let go, let be, laugh and sing for joy at the wonderfullness of the all!

 

[lionheart]

Not sure about that.

If you ran a Coulrophobic on; "From where could you communicate to a clown?" he could key-out without spotting an incident or postulate. He just mocks-up the scenario and sees no danger in it so that aspect of his case destimulates.

Objectives lead to key-outs and incidents don't always come up.

The light key-outs seems to come from letting go of a compulsive lookingness/communicatingness with an incident/s. I don't regard that as as-isness.

This is one of the problems with using Scientologese. It masks the obvious and gets us all figuring and studying and reading dictionaries.

Unfortunately LRH degraded "releasing" and made it less valuable than "erasing" or "as-ising". I suspect that might be because he realised releasing was easy and didn't create "dedicated" cult members.

Within Scn terminolgy you are quite correct. But think for a moment outside the Scn box.

Suppose there is no past or future, just suppose there is only "Now" (as per Eckhart Tolle).

"Now" I feel sad about the argument I had with someone. The argument isn't here, the memory and feelings associated with it are now and that IS all there is. There is no argument, just thoughts, images and feelings about it. That's all there is. And this argument is troubling me NOW. I'm holding onto it and can't release it. Perhaps it helps me to hold onto it, perhaps I'm resisting it and therefore making it stay. Now and Now and Now. The person I argued with isn't creating it now, I am.

Releasing it from Now is done by allowing the feelings to be there, or letting them go or welcoming them or deciding I don't need to change how I feel, or realising the feeling is there because it satisfies a want or need or desire and letting that want go.

If it releases, it isn't here now. So where is it? Really, seriously where is it? It is nowhere, nowhen because there only is here and now, there is no then or there.

"Ah, but it might come back," you say. So what? Let it go again. "Ah but it keeps re-occurring and I'm sick of it, I want to erase it for good, forever, permanently."

Well apart from the fact that there is no "permanent", there is no "for good" - there is only now. There is still something you can do. If it re-occurs and that bothers you, stop trying to stop it! Let it come back. or what does that feeling satisfy? what are you lacking that it fullfills?

The same releasing process will release it and one-now you realise it is not there!

Handling anything that is not here now, is pointless, literally - there is no point to handle! The more letting go you do, the less letting go there is to do. Life provides you with plenty to allow and one glorious day you are at one with life and all is well, just as it always was!

 

[Tanstaafl]

Are you criticizing my evil purpose?

.

Vinay, I don't always get you, but you're alright!

 

[Tanstaafl]

LH - thanks for that.

The "Now" is "when" the thetan has his attention. It doesn't have to be agreed-upon. I see value in Tolle's work but I think it's simplistic. Personally, I prefer Byron Katie's release method.

How long is now?
No, don't answer that! I've had my fill on this thread. I'll lick my wounds and come back later.

Cheers

tanstaafl

 

[lionheart]

LH - thanks for that.

The "Now" is "when" the thetan has his attention. It doesn't have to be agreed-upon. I see value in Tolle's work but I think it's simplistic. Personally, I prefer Byron Katie's release method.

How long is now?
No, don't answer that! I've had my fill on this thread. I'll lick my wounds and come back later.

Cheers

tanstaafl

The simplest things are the best! Didn't old hubbo say complexity is proportional to the degree of non-confront. But bah! what did he know! The creator of reams of conflicting orders.

I know many people who like using Byron Katie - never used it myself, that's cool.

Rest, NOW!

Sometimes these threads can sort of suck you dry, can't they?

 

[Tanstaafl]

The simplest things are the best! Didn't old hubbo say complexity is proportional to the degree of non-confront. But bah! what did he know! The creator of reams of conflicting orders.

I think there is some mileage in using SCS when holding onto things.
Consciously changing the degree of "grippingness" can help overcome the automaticity and aid letting go.

Hey - I invented a word ending in ness - Grippingness! I'm a guru!

I know many people who like using Byron Katie - never used it myself, that's cool.

Each to his own.
Sedona just didn't appeal to me.
I'd definitely use BK's method to help others. It's simple and it makes it easy for the recipient to spot that it's not the thing they are worried about that is the problem, it's their thoughts about it.

Sometimes these threads can sort of suck you dry, can't they?

Failed communicating.
Oh well, at least I know what I'm talking about.......................er, I do don't I?

Cheers LH.
Don't forget: letting go is good, but staying "local" is better!

 

[Bea Kiddo]

LH - thanks for that.

The "Now" is "when" the thetan has his attention. It doesn't have to be agreed-upon. I see value in Tolle's work but I think it's simplistic. Personally, I prefer Byron Katie's release method.

How long is now?
No, don't answer that! I've had my fill on this thread. I'll lick my wounds and come back later.

Cheers

tanstaafl

Well, LRH answer would be: (He said this in a tape somewhere)

A thetans present time (now) is different from thetan to thetan. Some have longer bands of present time than others. Its how much that thetan can handle (os "takes in" if you will) of present time.

That is how long now is. Stealing from Div 6: Your mileage may vary.

So Tans, your "Now" can be any time frame at all.

LRH even mentioned it being seconds, minutes, days and years.

Its a tape from the early 50's. No idea how to find it (In that, I am useless, sorry. Maybe Alan or Paul knows. It was a tape series that came out in the 90's between 92 and 95).

 

[Tanstaafl]

Well, LRH answer would be: (He said this in a tape somewhere)

A thetans present time (now) is different from thetan to thetan. Some have longer bands of present time than others. Its how much that thetan can handle (os "takes in" if you will) of present time.

That is how long now is. Stealing from Div 6: Your mileage may vary.

So Tans, your "Now" can be any time frame at all.

LRH even mentioned it being seconds, minutes, days and years.

Its a tape from the early 50's. No idea how to find it (In that, I am useless, sorry. Maybe Alan or Paul knows. It was a tape series that came out in the 90's between 92 and 95).

Thanks for that, Bea.
I don't think I've come across that ref' but there is one on the BC tapes about the "span of present time" which is very interesting.

Isn't there a drill on the BC where you learn to spot reads on the meter of diminishing duration? In the tape I mentioned, he discusses the training of spotters on warships to identify enemy aircraft from friendly aircraft when seen fleetingly through the clouds.

 

[Bea Kiddo]

Thanks for that, Bea.
I don't think I've come across that ref' but there is one on the BC tapes about the "span of present time" which is very interesting.

Isn't there a drill on the BC where you learn to spot reads on the meter of diminishing duration? In the tape I mentioned, he discusses the training of spotters on warships to identify enemy aircraft from friendly aircraft when seen fleetingly through the clouds.

Hmmm... if there is such a drill, I dont remember doing it.

Maybe not with reads, but with something else.

I dont think so, actually, no.

Just observation drills.

BC supes had to learn to read a meter and catch and instant read from 25 plus feet away. I got pretty good at it. (sessions were videoed and the auditor would go check if I was right after session. And shure as shoot, I was....)

 

[lionheart]

I think there is some mileage in using SCS when holding onto things.
Consciously changing the degree of "grippingness" can help overcome the automaticity and aid letting go.

Hey - I invented a word ending in ness - Grippingness! I'm a guru!



Each to his own.
Sedona just didn't appeal to me.
I'd definitely use BK's method to help others. It's simple and it makes it easy for the recipient to spot that it's not the thing they are worried about that is the problem, it's their thoughts about it.




Failed communicating.
Oh well, at least I know what I'm talking about.......................er, I do don't I?

Cheers LH.
Don't forget: letting go is good, but staying "local" is better!

All hail Guru Tans!

SCS - love it. You could try:
Could you change how you are holding onto it?
Could you stop holding onto it
Could you start holding onto it?

This is local releasing for gentle people, we'll have no shouting here! :wink2:

 

[Tanstaafl]

All hail Guru Tans!

I could get a taste for that. Oh-oh!

SCS - love it. You could try:
Could you change how you are holding onto it?
Could you stop holding onto it
Could you start holding onto it?

Interesting.
I love looking at all the variables in a situation and playing with them.

This is local releasing for gentle people, we'll have no shouting here! :wink2:

Quite right!
Only those who have released should be allowed to touch the "precious things". Ooerr.

 

[lionheart]

Well, LRH answer would be: (He said this in a tape somewhere)

A thetans present time (now) is different from thetan to thetan. Some have longer bands of present time than others. Its how much that thetan can handle (os "takes in" if you will) of present time.

That is how long now is. Stealing from Div 6: Your mileage may vary.

So Tans, your "Now" can be any time frame at all.

LRH even mentioned it being seconds, minutes, days and years.

Its a tape from the early 50's. No idea how to find it (In that, I am useless, sorry. Maybe Alan or Paul knows. It was a tape series that came out in the 90's between 92 and 95).

How does that LRH concept bring about a resolution of "case"?

Using that LRH definition of Present Time, the widest time span a person's "present time" could be, would be forever. All the past, all futures. Would they be OT or psychotic?

The shortest time span a person's "present time" could be, would be only right now. Would they be sane or mad?

Whatever Ron said, there is only right now, right here. That right now could include "memories" of not here nows and "imaginings" of not-happened nows. But those memories and imaginings are only here in the now.

His Objectives and TRs were designed to release the memories and the imaginings. They usually worked pretty well. Anyone remember the brightness and aliveness of the Now after a good session?

 

[lionheart]

I could get a taste for that. Oh-oh!

He's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy!

Interesting.
I love looking at all the variables in a situation and playing with them.

Squirrel! SP! He's a witch - burn him!

Quite right!
Only those who have released should be allowed to touch the "precious things". Ooerr.

Is that you Dave?

 

[Tanstaafl]

He's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy!

Squirrel! SP! He's a witch - burn him!

Is that you Dave?

I'm sure there are some onlookers thinking "WTF are they talking about?!"

Oh, the joys of Anglo-Saxon humour!

 

[Bea Kiddo]

How does that LRH concept bring about a resolution of "case"?

Using that LRH definition of Present Time, the widest time span a person's "present time" could be, would be forever. All the past, all futures. Would they be OT or psychotic?

The shortest time span a person's "present time" could be, would be only right now. Would they be sane or mad?

Whatever Ron said, there is only right now, right here. That right now could include "memories" of not here nows and "imaginings" of not-happened nows. But those memories and imaginings are only here in the now.

His Objectives and TRs were designed to release the memories and the imaginings. They usually worked pretty well. Anyone remember the brightness and aliveness of the Now after a good session?

They would be OT or psychotic for sure.

But who knows, maybe that is the same thing!!!

(since I am only OT V, I am only 1/2 psychotic!!! YEAH!!)

 

[Vinaire]

I can slip into Scientologese, quite happily, thanks for your concern.

But why bother? English is a perfectly good language. Scientologese is a cult-trap mechanism to make the mundane esoteric and special and unique to the cult. It re-inforces the cult lie that the cult is the only solution.

You see, you pulled that Scn trick again didn't you? You did the Scn trick with your question of trying to invalidate and introvert someone by implying "case".

You are a naughty Scientologist! :wink2:

Try talking for a week on here without using a single Scn word - see what happens. You have absolutely nothing to lose by trying it.

Your Friend Dennis Erlich used to advise this.

Instead of using the word as-is, try using "letting go". See if you can spot yourself letting go of something. Releasing is normal and natural. Words like as-ising make it seem special and only available through Scn.

Letting go is a god-given gift, treat yourself to the present. (literally).

My native tongue is Hindi. Now if you can talk in Hindi that would make more sense than either Scientologese or English of Christian missionaries.

.

 

[Vinaire]

Vin has become a real life smartass!!

What have you lot done to him??

 

[lionheart]

My native tongue is Hindi. Now if you can talk in Hindi that would make more sense than either Scientologese or English of Christian missionaries.

.

Am I Mettreya?
Do you see me now?
I wish it were Pali.