Love is the answer.

[Moonchild]

A paradox is also a church dedicated to total spiritual freedom dramatizing the opposite.

As the church progresses it seems to want thought to stop, when so much of its materials encourage new thinking.

Funny, just yesterday I was reading in Dianetics about dramatizations and the effect of breaking them; breaking a dramatization results in a shift to another valence....

Has the church in its history dramatized the very things it is set up to alleviate? Has it shifted valences?

Paradox, two opposing forces.

Solution? A singularity, a recognition and acceptance of the duality of things, embracing both opposing forces.

Love accepts, love is acceptable. Is it a singularity that encompasses?

When love is given unconditionally it must accept the possibilty of exploitation and betrayal, otherwise it wouldn't be unconditional.

This rapidly leads to consideration of what some describe as the tension between the "right-hand path" and the "left-hand path", or in other words, does one accept the annihilation of self for the greater good, perhaps in noble submission to the will of the universe; or does one consider that the true nobility consists in asserting oneself as a valued part of the universe?

The symbol Jesus Christ would typify the former and Aleister Crowley the latter.

For "Jesus" love meant acceptance even unto death; for Crowley love was mere sentimentalism unless practised "under will"....in accordance with destiny. I suspect LRH owed more to AC than JC...figure as thou wilt

 

[alex]

When love is given unconditionally it must accept the possibilty of exploitation and betrayal, otherwise it wouldn't be unconditional.

This rapidly leads to consideration of what some describe as the tension between the "right-hand path" and the "left-hand path", or in other words, does one accept the annihilation of self for the greater good, perhaps in noble submission to the will of the universe; or does one consider that the true nobility consists in asserting oneself as a valued part of the universe?

The symbol Jesus Christ would typify the former and Aleister Crowley the latter.

For "Jesus" love meant acceptance even unto death; for Crowley love was mere sentimentalism unless practised "under will"....in accordance with destiny. I suspect LRH owed more to AC than JC...figure as thou wilt

I tend to think of love as being a state of grace slightly less ultimate that the pure existence of a person in spirit.

If spirit in essence is infinite potential, yet not fully acted on, below that or more involved in realizing that potential, by manifesting outward existence, would be the state of acceptance and acceptability I have labeled "love".

Perhaps this is the first duality, the first thing that is not infinite? The first separation from infinite potential....and then from there, ever expanding branches of potential versus other potential....all the way down to mud.

I am a big fan of Crowley. There is a lot to be learned from him and I believe that was his purpose, rather than evil.

I would certainly agree Hubbard spoke more from that viewpoint than the Jesus model. But I do not think hubbard vectored in opposition to the unconditional acceptance preached and displayed by jesus, as much as he tried to chart a path to an overview of the whole thing.

Acceptance would seem to need something to accept. But moving to a larger context where both sides of a apparent dichotomy are under your control, would free you. And engaging both sides of things, to the point of understanding them and thus having a contextual overview, that continually expands, would be the reverse of the path we have traveled through time.

I do believe that the state we started out from is directly accessible though.

It is just a held thought, that all we have created and believe to exist, has any hold on us.

And love may just be the shortcut home.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

I think Crowley wasn't evil at all but I think he got off on pretending to be and pissing people off. Hubbard, OTOH, wanted people to think he was less venal and more fair than he actually was. So both of them kind of misled people in that.

 

[Moonchild]

I tend to think of love as being a state of grace slightly less ultimate that the pure existence of a person in spirit.

If spirit in essence is infinite potential, yet not fully acted on, below that or more involved in realizing that potential, by manifesting outward existence, would be the state of acceptance and acceptability I have labeled "love".

Perhaps this is the first duality, the first thing that is not infinite? The first separation from infinite potential....and then from there, ever expanding branches of potential versus other potential....all the way down to mud.

I am a big fan of Crowley. There is a lot to be learned from him and I believe that was his purpose, rather than evil.

I would certainly agree Hubbard spoke more from that viewpoint than the Jesus model. But I do not think hubbard vectored in opposition to the unconditional acceptance preached and displayed by jesus, as much as he tried to chart a path to an overview of the whole thing.

Acceptance would seem to need something to accept. But moving to a larger context where both sides of a apparent dichotomy are under your control, would free you. And engaging both sides of things, to the point of understanding them and thus having a contextual overview, that continually expands, would be the reverse of the path we have traveled through time.

I do believe that the state we started out from is directly accessible though.

It is just a held thought, that all we have created and believe to exist, has any hold on us.

And love may just be the shortcut home.

Thought-provoking post Alex, thanks. Not sure I agree about Hubbard...I wonder whether you're being too generous, but then this thread is about love isn't it? If one has issues regarding LRH then the principle would apply there too.

I think Crowley wasn't evil at all but I think he got off on pretending to be and pissing people off. Hubbard, OTOH, wanted people to think he was less venal and more fair than he actually was. So both of them kind of misled people in that.

Crowley certainly enjoyed the eminence noir notoriety accorded him by the press of his day; it was a sop to his vanity, but he apparently miscalculated the damage it would ultimately do to him and his belief-system.

As regards LRH, at this point in time that's how I tend to see him too.

 

[Moonchild]

If spirit in essence is infinite potential, yet not fully acted on, below that or more involved in realizing that potential, by manifesting outward existence, would be the state of acceptance and acceptability I have labeled "love".

Perhaps this is the first duality, the first thing that is not infinite? The first separation from infinite potential....and then from there, ever expanding branches of potential versus other potential....all the way down to mud.

A separate subject perhaps: what do think brought about this initial fall from grace? The question arises in many places in many forms...it's just something I find intriguing; There's obviously no "snap" answer...if there were the mystery of the universe might be solved. I'm just interested to hear any opinion or view you may have.

Acceptance would seem to need something to accept. But moving to a larger context where both sides of a apparent dichotomy are under your control, would free you. And engaging both sides of things, to the point of understanding them and thus having a contextual overview, that continually expands, would be the reverse of the path we have traveled through time.

Yes, that groks to me; and the issue is how to achieve this; the game we're all involved in I suppose.

O.K., you're proposing (quite rightly IMHO) that love is the way. By "love" I mean pretty much what LRH seemed to suggest i.e., the particle of admiration? The wiillingness to BE the object viewed?

The difficulty would seem to be in maintaining a state of love...and this is where religious practice proposes itself as a means, a process toward attainment of that end?

Before I go any further, if you're willing to say more, does this make sense or am I talking total bollocks? Frankness wouldn't attract criticism

Regards, MC.

 

[alex]

A separate subject perhaps: what do think brought about this initial fall from grace? The question arises in many places in many forms...it's just something I find intriguing; There's obviously no "snap" answer...if there were the mystery of the universe might be solved. I'm just interested to hear any opinion or view you may have.

I would say there was no precipitous fall...just us creating, creating anything, and then we exist, rather than just being potential, and it all takes off from there.

The first instance of realizing any of the potential is the first step on the path, and then all the data of the axioms, and all the others universes colliding with our own and creating mest, and then and then and then....

Read the Pilots "jewel of knowledge" stuff....

I think it was not a fall from grace, but just us, being us. Living, learning, and looking for a way to clean up after ourselves.

Yes, that groks to me; and the issue is how to achieve this; the game we're all involved in I suppose.

O.K., you're proposing (quite rightly IMHO) that love is the way. By "love" I mean pretty much what LRH seemed to suggest i.e., the particle of admiration? The wiillingness to BE the object viewed?

The difficulty would seem to be in maintaining a state of love...and this is where religious practice proposes itself as a means, a process toward attainment of that end?

Before I go any further, if you're willing to say more, does this make sense or am I talking total bollocks? Frankness wouldn't attract criticism

Regards, MC.

Yes the difficulty is in maintaining a state. But it is only because we are maintaining other states as well which we dont want to let go of.

I find human life to be pretty darn fun sometimes, the smell of a forrest, the song of birds, sappy love feelings for others, etc.

I have no desire to return to "native state". (as the church sometimes implies might be a desirable goal )

I do however want to have better understanding and control of who and what I am and what I do.

Religion is those various attempts by people to do this. And they have value IN THE CONTEXT THAT THEY EXIST. But part of their purpose is to move out of that very context. Paradox!

I say use em and discard em. Religions, philosophies, practices. Dont get stuck in them though!

They are good for finding support and tools and like minded people.

 

[Telepathetic]

Love is the answer! What I learn from the sad story of my brother Uwe is that we maybe should not only cover up all the wrong doings and crimes of Scientology but also spread love to as many Scientologists as possible. It's Christmas soon and I think I will write many Postcards with love and best wishes to many Scientologists. They need our help - even those who where not really nice to us or our friends or relatives. They waste their life on a fake.
Let us help them with our love and heart.
This is what is missing in first place in the Church of Scientology!!

Let's see if it works

Markus

You're a great man Markus, I really mean that!

 

[Moonchild]

I would say there was no precipitous fall...just us creating, creating anything, and then we exist, rather than just being potential, and it all takes off from there.

The first instance of realizing any of the potential is the first step on the path, and then all the data of the axioms, and all the others universes colliding with our own and creating mest, and then and then and then....

Read the Pilots "jewel of knowledge" stuff....

I think it was not a fall from grace, but just us, being us. Living, learning, and looking for a way to clean up after ourselves.

Yes the difficulty is in maintaining a state. But it is only because we are maintaining other states as well which we dont want to let go of.

I find human life to be pretty darn fun sometimes, the smell of a forrest, the song of birds, sappy love feelings for others, etc.

I have no desire to return to "native state". (as the church sometimes implies might be a desirable goal )

I do however want to have better understanding and control of who and what I am and what I do.

Religion is those various attempts by people to do this. And they have value IN THE CONTEXT THAT THEY EXIST. But part of their purpose is to move out of that very context. Paradox!

I say use em and discard em. Religions, philosophies, practices. Dont get stuck in them though!

They are good for finding support and tools and like minded people.

Re: my "bold" on your words above; yes, those are my current sentiments too...given that for myself the relationship with "native state" or however it might be described still continues to fascinate.

O.K., think I'm done here at the mo'. Thanks for your responses

 

[alex]

Baby bodhi tree
Gnarled old small
Under it I sit
Tickled by the grass.
Half in the world
Mostly in the past
All of me knowing
Illusion will not last...
Sweet illusion in the grass

 

[AnonyMary]

Love is the answer.

That is my conclusion.

Now I just have to find my way to it, to manifesting it... [..]

My signature line on Hipforums.com ....

"Enlightenment = loving awareness, open heart and still mind. And there is no path to it because it is where you are, when you are and how you are.
Everything else is a game you play with yourself to hide from it.
Alex Singh (Inspired by Gangaji)"

And now to find where, when and how I am so that I may....

Hi Alex,
I enjoyed reading this thread and watching the "Validation" short.

I see that you have become more 'open minded' than a year ago and that's a good thing. Even though Co$ says it's a form of PTSness, the enlightened know better. Freedom of choice is a fundamental human need.

Since you asked about love, I'll just post my understanding of it, as you might well have predicted:

"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always preserves."
-- 1 Corinthians 13:4-7

Perhaps it will give you further insight into the subject as it did for me.

~ Mary McConnell

 

[alex]

Its simply too much to love the whole world. I've tried, but I cant muster it. It's a noble goal, even a necessary thing, but somehow unreachable.

Looking at the reasons I can't, simply brings into view the things I should be big enough to love, but don't. Love my enemy as myself? Not Happening. Love my neighbor as myself? Not even that. Love my self? Occasionally.

Looking at the those failures is a path to diminishing love, a path away from it. A focus on the lack of love.

Perhaps I need to look at what I can love unconditionally.

A Blade of grass with a nice drop of dew on it.

A pretty yellow breasted bird on my tomato cage this morning.

I'm up to that.

I need to go look at things....what I see here is more than I can love.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWTuSM6zJ_A

 

[alex]

I am nothing

who imagines i can be

who's thoughts take form

for you to see

Under minds spell

over life's domain

something out of nothing

yet nothing remains.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdzPp9cRKN0&feature=related

 

[well_that_sucked]

The creepy creep scilon went up the bridge to hell
Down came the mindfuck and whacked the scilon out
Out came the truth and scared the scilon off
But the creepy creepy scilon won't shut its culty mouth

 

[alex]

The creepy creep scilon went up the bridge to hell
Down came the mindfuck and whacked the scilon out
Out came the truth and scared the scilon off
But the creepy creepy scilon won't shut its culty mouth

 

[Telepathetic]

Hey Alex,

Thanks for the video.

TP

 

[alex]

love is the answer

a little light be

still in the vortex

of INSANITY

something to hold on too

something to be

love is the answer

I love you

luv, me.

 

[Doom]

We *love* you Alex.

 

[Telepathetic]

love is the answer

a little light be

still in the vortex

of INSANITY

something to hold on too

something to be

love is the answer

I love you

luv, me.

Great to see you again.

Love,

TP

 

[Markus]

Hello!

love is the answer

a little light be

still in the vortex

of INSANITY

something to hold on too

something to be

love is the answer

I love you

luv, me.

Hey Alex,

it is great to have you back here.

Love
Markus

 

[Wisened One]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsovXU9OxVw