Aiki
Patron with Honors
Hubbardism is a anti hubbard hubbardism.
They did, they didn't and they do. All three are correct. Showing someone is easy.
Peace.Aiki.
M.U. On The dynamics, my thoughts.
- Thread starter Aiki
- Start date
Hubbardism is a anti hubbard hubbardism.
They did, they didn't and they do. All three are correct. Showing someone is easy.
Peace.Aiki.
Gadfly
Crusader
What are you babbling on about now? :confused2:
The notion of operating as a 'thetan" outside of a body, with full perception, and able to cause things directly affecting matter, energy, space and time, was most certainly NEW. Before that there were notions like "astral traveling", which had very little to do with what Hubbard was talking about.
You can't just jump in with some sort of weird "logic" based on "As it was nothing new . . . blah-blah-blah".
Jesus, you can be almost . . . painful to read at times.
This trick or habit of trying to somehow wash everything away with this trite comment of "nothing new" is getting very boring.
You just ASSUME that he must have collated it from various sources. THAT IS BULLSHIT. Get familiar with the Theosophical movement and Spiritualism as they swept across Europe and America. These were the actual start of the New Age movement, of which Scientology is a natural member. After Theosophy came things like Rosicrucianism, Masonry, various studies in the occult, Steiner's Anthroposophy, the Golden Dawn, Crowley's O.T.O., along with various eastern swamis and gurus (such as Paramahansa Yogananda, Meher Baba, and others).
I read hundreds of books by these authors when I was in my twenties and thirties. It used to kill me at times how Scientologists had absolutely NO IDEA of the context within which they existed as a subject and practice. I experimented with many of these other practices before, during and after Scientology. I used to get sent to ethics for "other practices" frequently - my own wife would write KRs on me for reading books on Black Magic and Theosophy while I was in the Sea Org as a Flag Rep! True story.
When I was a Flag Rep in Toronto, the LRH Comm and myself would spend HOURS talking about details of Alice Bailey's "blue books" (theosophy - channelings from Tibetan Buddhist swamis). I loved ALL of that stuff. I still got a part of me that does. But I like the hard-core stuff - not Hubbard's pablum.
While there were similarities, each tended to develop along its own lines, theories and unique notions. NONE have the notion of operating with full awareness outside of the body. Nearly ALL other systems involve moving around outside in some "other type of body" - astral body, etheric body. The astral body is said to be connected to the physical body by an etheric silver cord. THOSE were the sorts of ideas that existed previously. "Remote Viewing" is very NOT similar to what Hubbard was describing.
Hubbard did NOT at all carefully "research" all of this, and COLLATE IT. That is such a false concept of what he actually did. That is quite delusional. THAT is a fiction. It is make-believe. Of course, as many have done before, you can accept and believe whatever nonsense that you choose. You sure aren't the first, and you won't be the last. Certainty is NOT "knowledge", at least it is not necessarily correct or valid knowledge.
Hubbard borrowed various ideas, made up a bunch of ideas, and like some of those before him, like Blavatsky of Theosophy, became a Master Trickster and Deceiver. While there may have been some substance to Blavatsky, she also suffered from the attitude that "lies were okay if it helped people find their way to the Ascended Masters". Hubbard understood her very well!
Hubbard read tons of stuff, often while he was high as a kite, and put it together into what he called "Scientology". He just made up loads of crap too - FICTION.
The processes do NOT work to make any sort of OT as described by Hubbard. Where do you get that from? What strange alternate universe do you peer into to come up with such an inane conclusion? So many people were so upset by NOT getting what they were promised with OT 4,5 and 6, that they were canceled. OT 4, 5 and 6 were taken from ROUTE 1 of TCOHA. Those are the drills that claim to be able to stabilize a thetan exterior, and re-familiarize it with the physical universe. Except the drills failed to do that. In fact, the people I talked to who did these drills said that it was more of a case that they "imagined" doing the drills. There IS a place for creative visualization in spiritual practices, but it is NOT within something that claims to "really be doing it".
I agree that some of the processes can help and be fun to some people some of the time. But, no application of the subject materials brings about anything even remotely similar to what Hubbard describes as "an OT".
Some people go exterior. Okay, but it happens to some, and it doesn't happen for others. There is no exact set of steps that can make it "happen" to anybody. It is hit or miss. I am glad that I got to experience it, BUT I know many others who did not. And, as I said, it happened on TRs, not from auditing at all. I had a friend that it happened to while doing TM (we learned it together), and he has spent over thirty years in Scientology trying to GET BACK what he experienced from TM (in one fleeting great moment).
The fact of the matter is that NO guru, no Master, no spiritual leader has EVER provided a set of tools that any person could use to "move a little higher". THAT was Hubbard's big claim - that FINALLY he did it, that he figured it all out and provided a mass production line, conveyor-belt type arrangement, where you could put Joe-Wog in on the left, and have him come out an "advanced aware being" on the right.
Scientologists are some of the least spiritual, and unaware people that I have ever come across.
Your logic is atrocious, and your assumptions are even worse.
While there might be a case all throughout time of some con man, some manipulate piece-of-shit shyster, who still managed to possess some "decent goods", that example is NOT Hubbard.
Reading your stuff at times can be so TEDIOUS. You are obviously not at all familiar with the evolution of spiritual ideas in the west since the mid-1800s. There is a lineage there. It is clear and easy to see, if anyone bothers to study up on it some.
Note: Hubbard started in 1950 or so with the idea that he could take any "thetan", tell it to be "three feet in back of its head", and then rehab the thetan using Route 1 to be a FULL OPERATING THETAN. Nobody could do it. Ever since that initial failure, he had been undercutting and undercutting and undercutting, trying to handle WHY the "thetan" couldn't do it. At no point in the history of Scientology has there EVER been a point where any combination of the "tech" could result in a stable OT as Hubbard defined it to be. THAT is the truth. If you look at reality that is, and not you imagination.
Last edited:
Free Being Me
Crusader
Confirmation bias
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
"Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.[Note 1][1] People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs."
Backfire effect
(Same Link)
"A similar cognitive bias found in individuals is the backfire effect, in which individuals challenged with evidence contradictory to their beliefs tend to reject the evidence and instead become an even firmer supporter of their initial belief."
Aiki
Patron with Honors
What are you babbling on about now? :confused2:
The notion of operating as a 'thetan" outside of a body, with full perception, and able to cause things directly affecting matter, energy, space and time, was most certainly NEW. Before that there were notions like "astral traveling", which had very little to do with what Hubbard was talking about.
You can't just jump in with some sort of weird "logic" based on "As it was nothing new . . . blah-blah-blah".
Jesus, you can be almost . . . painful to read at times.
This trick or habit of trying to somehow wash everything away with this trite comment of "nothing new" is getting very boring.
just ASSUME that he must have collated it from various sources. THAT IS BULLSHIT. Get familiar with the Theosophical movement and Spiritualism as they swept across Europe and America. These were the actual start of the New Age movement, of which Scientology is a natural member. After Theosophy came things like Rosicrucianism, Masonry, various studies in the occult, Steiner's Anthroposophy, the Golden Dawn, Crowley's O.T.O., along with various eastern swamis and gurus (such as Paramahansa Yogananda, Meher Baba, and others).
While there were similarities, each tended to develop along its own lines, theories and unique notions. NONE have the notion of operating with full awareness outside of the body. Nearly ALL other systems involve moving around outside in some "other type of body" - astral body, etheric body. The astral body is said to be connected to the physical body by an etheric silver cord. THOSE were the sorts of ideas that existed previously.
Hubbard did NOT do at all carefully "research" all of this, and COLLATE IT. That is such a false concept of what he did. That is quite delusional. THAT is a fiction. It is make-believe. Of course, as many have done before, you can accept and believe whatever nonsense that you choose. You sure aren't the first, and you won't be the last. Certainty is NOT "knowledge", at least it is not necessarily correct or valid knowledge.
Hubbard borrowed various ideas, made up a bunch of ideas, and like some of those before him, like Blavatsky of Theosophy, became a Master Trickster and Deceiver. While there may have been some substance to Blavatsky, she also suffered from the attitude that "lies were okay if it helped people find their way to the Ascended Masters". Hubbard understood her very well!
Hubbard read tons of stuff, often while he was high as a kite, and put it together into what he called "Scientology". He just made up loads of crap too - FICTION.
The processes do NOT work to make any sort of OT as described by Hubbard. Where do get that from? What strange alternate universe do you peer into to come up with such an inane conclusion? So many people were so upset by NOT getting what they were promised with OT 4,5 and 6, that they were canceled. OT 4, 5 and 6 were taken from ROUTE 1 of TCOHA. Those are the drills that claim to be able to stabilize a thetan exterior, and re-familiarize it with the physical universe. Except the drills failed to do that. In fact, the people I talked to who did these drills said that it was more of a case that they "imagined" doing the drills. There IS a place for creative visualization in spiritual practices, but it is NOT withn something that claims to "really be doing it".
The fact of the matter is that NO guru, no Master, no spiritual leader has EVER provided a set of tools that any person could use to "move a little higher". THAT was Hubbard's big claim - that FINALLY he did it, that he figured it all out and provided a mass production line, conveyor-belt type arrangement, where you could put Joe-Wog in on the left, and have him come out an "advanced aware being" on the right.
Scientologists are some of the least spiritual, and unaware people that I have ever come across.
Your logic is atrocious, and your assumptions are even worse.
While there might be a case all throughout time of some con man, some manipulate piece-of-shit shyster, who still managed to possess some "decent goods", that example is NOT Hubbard.
Reading your stuff at times can be so TEDIOUS. You are obviously not at all familiar with the evolution of spiritual ideas in the west since the mid-1800s. There is a lineage there. It is clear and easy to see, if anyone bothers to study up on it some.
If it was part of a spiritual movement called new age which in turn were based on past things then it's nothing new.
The definitions given in the previous posts on this thread, supplied by Veda do not include full perception in their wording. Not that it would matter really because as I said people don't understand what that means generally. The notion is nowhere near new. One minute you say crowley said it then you say when hubbard says it it's new.
Of course he researched it. You can take anything and research it.
You are talking double dutch from my perspective. You say he didn't collate it from various sources and then go on to say he borrowed them.
You give a whole load of historical stuff on it and then say it's new.
Whether he was high as a kite or not has nothing to do with it, the beatles probably were too when they wrote your favorite tunes.
They work because I know what it means and can see when someone does them or not and to what degree.
Looks like you don't know why they were cancelled. So for me just validates what I know.
Folks you talked to said they think they imagined it? Sounds about right. Give a person any spiritual reality and within a couple of days they'll be doubting it. Standard.
A set of tools to move a little higher? You actually believe no one ever done that before? Nah, I don't believe you.
Lineage equals what? apart from proving it's therefor not original. You just prove my point.
I reckon any spiritualist with just a little reality will understand those definitions given in this thread without much trouble. Therefor I conclude you don't understand them. In fact I believe you are trying very hard not to. (of course I may be very mistaken)
Peace.Aiki.
Aiki
Patron with Honors
Confirmation bias
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
"Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.[Note 1][1] People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs."
Backfire effect
(Same Link)
"A similar cognitive bias found in individuals is the backfire effect, in which individuals challenged with evidence contradictory to their beliefs tend to reject the evidence and instead become an even firmer supporter of their initial belief."
PEOPLE WITH M.U'S EFFECT:
tEND TO DIG UP ANY REASON TO MAKE THE SUBJECT OR ANYONE SAYING IT MAKES SENSE WRONG.
PEACE.AIKI.
Gadfly
Crusader
Hubbard's description of "OT" NEVER existed before. Show me anywhere else that describes roaming about with full consciousness of the physical universe without any sort of astral body? Most other practices and religions are VERY HAZY on what the soul or spirit is, and Hubbard's term "thetan" is entirely unique among the rest of them. It is largely nonsense, but it WAS "new" and unique.
Just because the idea was "new" doesn't mean that it held any value.
There have been many "new" ideas that weren't valid. Of course, most ideas do relate to previous ideas in some way or another.
The ideas of Quantum Mechanics were quite new, had no earlier precedent, and DID have some value.
There has never been one person who could "operate exterior", separate from a body, stably, and also able to intentionally cause effects in matter, energy. space and time - not through Scientology processes. How do you get from there to "it works"? :confused2:
Aiki
Patron with Honors
Hubbard's description of "OT" NEVER existed before. Show me anywhere else that describes roaming about with full consciousness of the physical universe without any sort of astral body? Most other practices and religions are VERY HAZY on what the soul or spirit is, and Hubbard's term "thetan" is entirely unique among the rest of them. It is largely nonsense, but it WAS "new" and unique.
Just because the idea was "new" doesn't mean that it held any value.
There have been many "new" ideas that weren't valid. Of course, most ideas do relate to previous ideas in some way or another.
The ideas of Quantum Mechanics were quite new, had no earlier precedent, and DID have some value.
There has never been one person who could "operate exterior", separate from a body, stably, and also able to intentionally cause effects in matter, energy. space and time - not through Scientology processes. How do you get from there to "it works"? :confused2:
Hold on a minute do you believe in past lives? Just yes or no will do.
Gadfly
Crusader
No. Not in any way described by Hubbard.
In fact though, I don't "believe in" much of anything. I gauge the world and universe around me in terms of possibilities and probabilities.
Tight strict belief and total certainty are for . . . weak-minded, simplistic, and unrealistic people. There are MANY of that type around.
And even if I did, that wouldn't necessarily mean that the notion of a "thetan" as described and defined by Hubbard was valid.
I think that what is actually going on is FAR more complex than any scenario delineated by Hubbard.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy. - Hamlet (1.5.166-7), Hamlet to Horatio
Free Being Me
Crusader
I appreciate the cult jargon to convince ex's you're enlightened while telling people how wrong they are with less than enlightening posts (putting it kindly), it is indicative of hubbard's psychological mind control called scientology, cult thought indoctrination I sincerely hope can be peeled away someday.
Gadfly
Crusader
Cripes, all of this attention on WORDS. Words are just symbols for real and imaginary things and relationships.
Forget about them. Look at REALITY. Observe what the word defines or describes.
There are no OTs made by Scientology - no matter HOW you choose to define "OT". Look at real people. Get out of your world of ideas in your head.
MUs or no MUs - there are NO OTs produced by techniques of Scientology. Unless you define "OT" to mean, "a person who sometimes feels better" (which would involve great amounts of back-peddling)..
Last edited:
Spirit
just another son of God
Commander,
You hit the nail on the head. I am one of the many. Early in life I began searching for a way out of the body. I tried astral projection among other approaches and failed. During my TRs and Objective coaudit, I went exterior with ease. If I had not been exposed to this tech, I doubt I would have ever gotten out.
Aiki
Patron with Honors
Hubbard's description of "OT" NEVER existed before. Show me anywhere else that describes roaming about with full consciousness of the physical universe without any sort of astral body? Most other practices and religions are VERY HAZY on what the soul or spirit is, and Hubbard's term "thetan" is entirely unique among the rest of them. It is largely nonsense, but it WAS "new" and unique.
Just because the idea was "new" doesn't mean that it held any value.
There have been many "new" ideas that weren't valid. Of course, most ideas do relate to previous ideas in some way or another.
The ideas of Quantum Mechanics were quite new, had no earlier precedent, and DID have some value.
There has never been one person who could "operate exterior", separate from a body, stably, and also able to intentionally cause effects in matter, energy. space and time - not through Scientology processes. How do you get from there to "it works"? :confused2:
Right, just wanted to know your view on past lives. Why? Because most eastern great enlightened folk....Buddha's, Gurus,Yogi's Brahmins etc had no problem knowing with great certainty and clarity and no problem saying so too. Tends to make you view things a bit differently too.
Only ego describes it in such a blase manner. When you take let's say the first definition given above and stick to it and actually see what it means without reference to whatever else he said at another time in some jovial fashion we may start getting somewhere.
How I get from there to it works....by knowing what OT means that's how.
You already said how you looked at what exterior with perception means. You concluded that the reality was most everyone was just viewing a screen via five physical perceptics. That SHOULD tell you something.
First it should tell you there ain't much perception going on. Rather it's more reception.
So there you are, most folk think this reception has something to do with perception. Yes, very EFFECT perception which ain't much perception at all. Hearing ain't listening. Seeing ain't viewing.
So if most are perceiving only what they are given then spiritually they ain't doing much at all, spiritually not too 'alive' spiritually not using their batteries. Batteries must be dead.
Kinda asleep. Now what is it that Buddha said? What was the goal again? What did the awakened one say? Mmmmmmm. something about waking up methinks.
So lets take some sleeping fella and give him a process. Wake him up a bit. Then ask him two days later when he's gone back to sleep what he thinks. Mmmmmm. not the best time.
So let's wake him up a bit again and ask him what he sees. Mmmmm, telling me he sees he can do a lot of things.
Kinda reminds me of those MANY buddhas of the past who specialized in waking folk up, you know, the ones with many tools, many ways of doing such. Good old boys.
Oh yeah, that fella who did a bit of waking up in my analogy what was that big word he used? Ahhhhh can. Mmmmm, where have I seen that before? Oh I know....In those definitions.
Then one of those definitions had the word could instead. Mmmmm. I wonder why?
Then again I remember personally many folk who had these things called cognitions, in fact many had realizations all of a certain type. The type which went something like "Bloody hell, I've been doing that all along and didn't realize it"
Mmmmmm. maybe it's not so much about whether you can be in certain conditions but rather when you are and yet deny it, kinda asleep to the fact.
Shame ego gets in the way of everything ain't it. The old ego, it either flat out denies it or flat out exaggerates it.
Lucky the old Buddhas took that into account I would say. Now there's a big difference.
Peace.Aiki.
lkwdblds
Crusader
Mine above in BOLD.
I exist at times where while I can enjoy my dog, or food, or whatever, but I truly have no attachment, and can walk away without a thought about it.
I look at this quite simply. There is pure spirit - awareness. It has no quality, no thought, no notions, no bias, no nothing. But it can be aware.
It can and does put itself into various contexts, to experience different aspects of things, or maybe, just for the hell of it.
There are as many different universes as there are possible contexts to imagine.
People get WAY TOO serious about "the way it is". And trying to figure out "how it is, really". Granted, often one needs to jump in and get involved, trying to "figure it all out", to "come to understand it", to thus arrive at a point where one can turn, walk away, and let it all go.
The only for-sure, real, fundamental quality or principle is AWARENESS. After that, there is CREATIVITY, that probably stems from this same awareness. And, the awareness watches and entertains itself with the stuff that is created by itself (such as this universe or any version of it on any plane associated with it).
From that all exists, and everything else is just commentary . . . . .
But, there is MUCH to the details - as much as we want to create and put there and see there. But, there is not any sort of always existing anything anywhere (such as an autonomous physical universe, or soul, or beings) separate from awareness, or from the awareness which probably created all that any of us experience.
The buck stops here, and you have followed it back to the beginning - awareness. The observer.
Awareness - - - - Creativity - - - - - .................................
I always enjoy talking with you lkwdblds; you get me thinking and looking and wondering about all sorts of things.
.........< snip >............
Gadfly, I think your post is very good but I wish to comment on one point which you made as follows: "While I love Einstein and his thought experiments, no physical body could exist in the situation he describes. It is something that never could and never would exist or happen. We don't and couldn't exist at or near the speed of light (not as a body.)"
Your statement above is not stated properly. For example, right now distant galaxies are receding away from Earth at very high rates of velocity. Consider fictional people on a planet in a galaxy 10 billion light years from Earth; it will be found that they are receding away from us at a very high rate of speed, say 3/4 C. Relativity theory states that there is no preferred frame of reference where one body may be considered to be at rest while the other body may be considered to be moving. It should not be assumed that Earth people are a rest while the people on the the distant planet are moving since they will see things as if they are stationary and we are moving. All that can be stated is that the two bodies are moving relative to one another. As a result of that concept, right now, at this very moment, people on Earth exist and are moving near the speed of light away from distant galaxies galaxies in this universe.
I know the point you are making relates more to the local environment here on Earth. Of course we are not able to accelerate a human being to near light speed relative to fixed objects here on Earth but if a manned space ship leaves Earth it would be feasible to achieve that result. Say astronauts are capable of accelerating indefinitely at 2 g's of acceleration (this is like an automobile going from 0 - 60 mph in 2.75 seconds). Leaving Earth, accelerating at 2 g's for about 6 months, the ship would be going more than 90% of light speed with respect to Earth. Maybe they visit a planet in a system 5 light years from Earth, they spend 6 months decelerating, take photos of the planet and make a U turn.. Now, another 6 months to accelerate back up to speed, 5 years at high speed to get back near Earth and then 6 months to decelerate and land. This would involve a journey of about 12 years when measured on board the spaceship. It is almost a certainty that much more than 12 years will have past here on Earth.
Test have been made here on Earth with atomic clocks to test time dilation on a smaller scale and atomic clocks have detected it. Here is a link to an article which explains it all. This is not really on topic for this thread but who knows, maybe someone is interested in this subject.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation
Lakey
Last edited:
Mimsey Borogrove
Crusader
How do you know we aren't the ones doing the receding? How would it look any different to them than it does to us? Mimsey
Veda
Sponsor
Everyone "went exterior" on the Objective co-audit, IIRC, it was pretty much an expected (mandatory) "EP." It was a feeling, and people were giddy over the idea of "being exterior." And there were those who decided, "Fine, I'm exterior," just to get off the course, but a gung-ho Scientologist is very proud - and feels a great debt to L. Ron Hubbard - for showing him or her the way to "be exterior," even though it's seldom more than an idea or a feeling.I'm not saying that paranormal or psychical experiences don't exist, or that "out of the Body Experiences" don't happen, but I am saying that Hubbard used exteriorization as a gimmick, so be careful.
Veda
Sponsor
Remote Viewing, as it's defined these days, is usually clairvoyance; astral travel, of course, involves a rarefied body as a vehicle.
Hubbard omitted astral travel from the Scientology curriculum. Was it a missing step?
From Aleister Crowley's 'Magick in Theory and Practice' -
This text is mentioned in the 'Philadelphia Doctorate Course' lectures of 1952, with the title 'The Master Therion'.
Chapter XVIII: '...Body of Light, its Power and Development...':
"You may also try 'Rising on the Planes' with a little practice... you ought to be able to step in and out of the astral body as easily as you slip in and out of a dressing gown. It will then no longer be necessary for your astral body to be sent far off..."
The idea, it seems, was to be out of the physical body with an astral body, and then be out of the astral body.
Looks like Hubbard skipped a level of rarefaction. Oops.
__________
IMO, there are many things that might be regarded as (Scientology term) "exteriorization." Hubbard made millions promising people "exteriorization with full perception," "stably and at will." Scientology didn't deliver, and Scientology regs and PR people have been weasel-wording their way out of that for decades (usually after the person has spent his money on the "OT levels" and been disappointed.)
In 'DMSMH', the word "exteriorization" is used to mean a kind of disassociation with regard to recall: the person recalls having burned his finger on a hot toaster in a kitchen, and sees his body in the kitchen as though exterior from it. This was not regarded as being out of the body, but a tendency to remember by re-creating the incident in ones mind rather than simply viewing the actual facsimiles of the event, which would have the person experiencing the event from inside his head and not seeing himself from outside. To "run" the incident properly, it would be necessary to bring the person "in valence," so he/she could view the facsimiles of the incident as-is, and not as a re-created version produced by his/her imagination.
The above 1950 Dianetic use of "exteriorization" is largely disregarded, as Scientologists are usually eager to "have gone exterior." IMO, much of the time this is group-pressure and wishful thinking.
As with the process of abreaction http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/abreaction , psychical phenomena (or interest in it) http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=239573&postcount=60 is exploited by Scientology, so it's a very mixed up situation - probably a dozen items are classed as the state of being "exterior."
There's what could be called a state of psychological disassociation; the there's being in one's body yet extending a kind of etheric finger and touching or perceiving remotely, while still being "in the body"; then there's being a golf ball sized etheric amoeba popping out of the body; then there's astral travel with an astral body which separates from the body, and a more rarefied "body" that separates from that. (This seems to be a missing bit of information in Scientology which sees astral bodies as "some mystic's delusion." ['Scn 8-8008']; and then there's the idea that one is naturally (as a "being") much larger than the body and that the body is in oneself (or one's being) not the other way around.
_________
Sometimes, using exteriorization as a "gimmick" backfired on Hubbard.
From a post by Alan Walter, from the 'Exterior with Full Perception' thread - post #35:
Possibly this was my most embarrassing incident to do with LRH.
It occurred on the Original Class VIII course, in Oct 1968.
We were docked in Corfu, a small Greek Island halfway between Greece and Italy.
Each night at 8.00 p.m. LRH gave a lecture.
We were in the main dining room which doubled as the lecture room. Behind LRH were the picture windows facing out to the docks across the way.
Thus there were an approx 300 of the upper level SO Staff and Class VIII students crammed into this room - facing Hubbard and Mary-Sue who sat alongside LRH - so except for LRH and MSH we all viewed the activities outside the windows.
Each night at around 8.30 pm there was a ferry from Corfu to Brindisi that would leave. It was very punctual. There was a lot of clanging and banging and the reving of engines and the ferry would come chugging past us - the sounds are probably still on the tapes.
Of course this pissed LRH off - he would turn and glare at the offending ferry boat.
Any way one night at the exact time there was the usual clanging and banging and the reving of engines the chugging past us noise.
LRH does not turn his head but stares straight us and proceeds to give us how he is exterior with full perceptics - and describes the ferry, etc. He was really puffed up with his ability to demonstrate his exterior with full perceptics.
The only problem was that night a tug boat towing a garbage scow was went past the windows.
We all witnessed it - the emperor was naked!!!
There was deathly silence in the room - the room went very solid. No one looked at another.
Later on only Fred Fairchild, Nev Chamberlin and I dare speak about it. But every staff member and future Class VIII were given a major withhold that night.
Alan
__________
And not to end on a down note, a song...
Douglas Traherne Harding:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=AK2m7rYjZ54
Last edited:
Rene Descartes
Gold Meritorious Patron
With all due respect to the mighty thetan and the thetan is supposed to be so mighty that the power of the thetan should be that of a god...
A mighty and powerful almighty thetan should be able to operate even if the mighty thetan is interiorized and impinged upon MEST (whatever the hell that means).
The problem with the mighty thetan is not that the mighty thetan is interiorized (whatever the hell that means). The problem is if the mighty thetan feels as though the mighty thetan is trapped while the mighty thetan is being interiorized (Whatever the hell that means)
The new trap that Hubbard presents to the mighty thetan becomes a trap of the nature that the mighty thetan needs to be exterior in order to operate fully and feel mighty and powerfully almighty.
The powerfully almighty thetan should be able to operate in a powerful and almighty capability whether the mighty thetan be imteriorized or exteriorized.
And all this technology on how to be a powerful and almighty thetan per L Rons philosophical renderings is being saved in a vault for the future of the universe.
Rd00
A mighty and powerful almighty thetan should be able to operate even if the mighty thetan is interiorized and impinged upon MEST (whatever the hell that means).
The problem with the mighty thetan is not that the mighty thetan is interiorized (whatever the hell that means). The problem is if the mighty thetan feels as though the mighty thetan is trapped while the mighty thetan is being interiorized (Whatever the hell that means)
The new trap that Hubbard presents to the mighty thetan becomes a trap of the nature that the mighty thetan needs to be exterior in order to operate fully and feel mighty and powerfully almighty.
The powerfully almighty thetan should be able to operate in a powerful and almighty capability whether the mighty thetan be imteriorized or exteriorized.
And all this technology on how to be a powerful and almighty thetan per L Rons philosophical renderings is being saved in a vault for the future of the universe.
Rd00
Last edited:
Spirit
just another son of God
Veda,
I'm not saying that paranormal or psychical experiences don't exist, or that "out of the Body Experiences" don't happen, but I am saying that Hubbard used exteriorization as a gimmick, so be careful.
I did go exterior a few times during the TRs and Obj coaudit, but my very first incident was after doing the 'Tone 40 on an ashtray' drill. I gave myself the Tone 40 command to be 3 feet behind my head and I found myself at the top of the room at a viewpoint a few feet from the point where the ceiling and wall met.
Oh yeah, reading Aleister Crowley's 'Magick in Theory and Practice' is on my to do list...
Last edited:
Spirit
just another son of God
Now dig this...
The Ultimate Aleister Crowley Collection(v.2.0) - E-Books+MP3s+V
http://thepiratebay.sx/torrent/8493...er_Crowley_Collection(v.2.0)_-_E-Books_MP3s_V
The Ultimate Aleister Crowley Collection(v.2.0) - E-Books+MP3s+V
http://thepiratebay.sx/torrent/8493...er_Crowley_Collection(v.2.0)_-_E-Books_MP3s_V
Veda
Sponsor
Veda,
I did go exterior a few times during the TRs and Obj coaudit, but my very first incident was after doing the 'Tone 40 on an ashtray' drill. I gave myself the Tone 40 command to be 3 feet behind my head and I found myself at the top of the room at a viewpoint a few feet from the point where the ceiling and wall met.It was more than a feeling or an idea for me.
Oh yeah, reading Aleister Crowley's 'Magick in Theory and Practice' is on my to do list...
You realize, of course, that you were "squirreling" when you added "be three feet," etc., to the ashtray drill.
If you're interested in Crowley, here are a few links that may be helpful:
'Yoga for Yellow Bellies', second lecture:
http://hermetic.com/crowley/eight-lectures-on-yoga/8yoga6.html
About the 'Naples Arrangement', excerpted from the 'Book of Thoth'
http://www.etarot.info/naples-arrangement
Some more Aleister Crowley - 'Little Essays Toward Truth':
http://www.hermetic.com/crowley/littleessays/man.html
Magick Without Tears:
http://www.hermetic.com/crowley/mwt_contents.html
While I've had Out of Body Experiences, I'm so glad that those experiences had nothing to do with Scientology.
How many people "went exterior on the comm course" and then spent years, sometimes, decades, and thousands, sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars, pursuing the same experience they had on the comm course?
Then they end up as OT 8s, where the "EP" is something like, "I don't know who I am, but I'd like to find out."
That Ron had quite a sense of humor.
Similar threads
