What's new

(My take on) Alternatives to Scn (Indie or CofS) for those who want a similar goal

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
I posted a thread yesterday discussing the most common arguments I've heard from people who disagreed with the choice of others to be indie, FZ or other non CofS Scientologists. As I said there, I felt that there are other things that people can do and that, although the thread was NOT meant to be about me but more about the arguments, that I personally was in favor of people making other ideological choices.

So what are the choices? Well, as some people have pointed out, some leave the cult and decide they don't want any religion or ology. Some are atheists. Ok, well and good. But what if a person liked the idea of trying to achieve something related to unlocking inner potential, something akin to reaching "Native State" or "OT" if a Scn'ist was phrasing that or "Nirvana" or "higher consciousness" if someone else might be. What if the person still had some of the same spiritual goals that either led him into Scn or that he derived from Scn, thought were worthy, didn't attain but still cared about? What if that person was convinced- as many people I've talked to truly are- that any study of Scn either independently or in the Freezone was not the way to go about it. What could be suggested?

Well, we're all going to have different ideas. The first thing my husband would say if he were discussing this is "depends on what you're trying to accomplish." which is exactly why I said what's posted above in blue. If you had someone who still had that particular dream but who was quite sure that he didn't want to try to address it through any sort of Scn thing in any way, shape or form then are there alternatives- GOOD ones?

I say "yes". As I said in the thread about other religions a couple weeks ago, I remember Advance Magazine discussing other ologies and isms then kind of putting them all down as not being as good as Scn. Well, I'm not convinced that it's true that nothing's going to do as well or get the person as far, should that person have such a spiritual goal and outlook in mind. I really don't think so.

So what do I suggest along those lines? I would suggest Buddhism, for one. Not just because Scn cribbed a lot from Buddhism- I really think that in some cases Buddhism addresses some of these things better. I think that Hubbard thought that the objectives of Buddhism might be great and all but unobtainable without confronting the past aberrative incidents. That sounds really cool and all but, although I've met some very together upper level OTs who struck me as rather powerful beings, I have yet to meet or hear of one single OT who had perfect confront, didn't get misemotional, or who was as close to reaching that goal (Whatever. Call it Nirvana, native state...) as advertised. Yet these people spent hours and hours and hours running through incidents, Dianetics, Scientology, NED for OTs, etc. And they even liked it. I can't get into everybody's head but these people I met did not strike me as better off than, say, the Dalai Lama or Thich Nhat Hanh or Swami Vivekananda or Paramansa Yogananda- who, yes, admitted to human failings but I've yet to meet an OT who wasn't rife with them.

I used to be told by people in Cof$ that the enlightened yogis, swamis, gurus, teachers- they were just "going out the bottom" to the top of the next tone scale. Hey, great justification! Nice way to explain it away but it doesn't explain ANYTHING. If it comes to that, how does that churchie know that the OTs they met who seemed pretty powerful hadn't "gone out the bottom"? It's a specious bit of rationalization, nothing more.

So do I honestly think that Buddhism and related disciplines and ologies such as the 8 fold path of Yoga really get a person up any significant distance in his search for enlightenment? Yes, I actually do.

I was wondering if occultism also does that. I personally think there are forces there that some occultists do tap into. I am not sure if all of them can handle it but again, can I see into all those people's heads? No. What about all the occultists I don't even know? That's right. I don't know what they've attained. It's my guess that there's something there.

As someone- perhaps Alanzo- said on my religions thread- the key may be mysticism and that's why there have been Christian saints who had great wisdom, as well. I think just about all the major religions- and many minor ones- have mystical traditions and offshoots. This may be what is so effective (in my personal opinion) about Eastern religions. The rich and long time mystical tradition. Other religions have it too but I think it's not on the forefront with them as it is in Eastern religions. But that's only how it seems to me.

And of course there are things created by people who used to do Scn but who do not consider themselves to be creating a Freezone or indie variety of Scn, such as Idenics.

Personally, I think that there are a lot of ways other than Scn to really and trulyadvance on one's spiritual path if one considers that one has one.
 

uniquemand

Unbeliever
Observe the environment. Determine what you think you can do, to maintain your own life, to improve conditions according to your own standards and those of the people you are concerned with (and whatever other "dynamics" you want to throw in). Start doing that thing. Learn how to do it better. Handle whatever charge you have. Whether through quiet meditation, if that works for you, through yoga, if that works for you (I see yoga as similar to objectives: you learn to control your breathing, your body, and to come to the present moment), through psychotherapy or auditing, if those work for you, whatever. As to the development of siddhis, or "OT Powers", I think that is a false goal, a way to tempt people to enslave themselves in hopes of gaining some power that doesn't exist. To those who say they do exist, I say, "show me".

The "spiritual path" stuff kinda cracks me up. Spirit is additive. You are you. Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.
 

Zinjifar

Silver Meritorious Sponsor
My take on Indie or FZ takes on failed Scientology.

Thanks to the obsessive *certainty* trained in in Scientology Training, even when *failed*, the Scientologist will attempt to make himself right by rationalizing the failures.

More important than *anything* is to rehabilitate the word 'Scientology' so that one will not feel silly admitting to having fallen for the scam.

Zinj
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
At this point, I'd like to discuss the goals people had and who still have them- what I like to call "the Nirvana goal". Not everyone still has that one when they get out of CofS but some do. And I think it could be fun to discuss how many OTHER ways there are of trying to get there. (I put in the "trying to" as an acknowledgement of the fact that this isn't science and that there are no guarantees, etc.)
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Sure, UM,

I guess some of this stuff is the way in which one looks at it which means there's a definite subjective element there.
 
So what do I suggest along those lines? I would suggest Buddhism, for one. Not just because Scn cribbed a lot from Buddhism- I really think that in some cases Buddhism addresses some of these things better. I think that Hubbard thought that the objectives of Buddhism might be great and all but unobtainable without confronting the past aberrative incidents. That sounds really cool and all but, although I've met some very together upper level OTs who struck me as rather powerful beings, I have yet to meet or hear of one single OT who had perfect confront, didn't get misemotional, or who was as close to reaching that goal (Whatever. Call it Nirvana, native state...) as advertised. Yet these people spent hours and hours and hours running through incidents, Dianetics, Scientology, NED for OTs, etc. And they even liked it. I can't get into everybody's head but these people I met did not strike me as better off than, say, the Dalai Lama or Thich Nhat Hanh or Swami Vivekananda or Paramansa Yogananda- who, yes, admitted to human failings but I've yet to meet an OT who wasn't rife with them.


Quite possibly because the ability to "confront past lives" is at best only a secondary aspect of increasing enlightenment not the objective itself. This is true both with spiritual practice generally and specifically with regard to Buddhist teachings. :)

In the Buddhist literature references to enlightened beings awareness of past lives figures only as tangental to more central achievements relating to insight, compassion, and the development of "skillful means" (the latter relating to increasing ability in teaching dharma to others).

Scientology techniques are useful practices for achieving enhanced spiritual insight but they are not a substitute for the goal of an enlightened individual. No practice is. Any techniques should be used or discarded to the degree it assists or impedes an individual's actual spiritual progress.

Many "spiritual seekers" of all varieties are primarily interested in enhancing some form of perceived personal "miraculous power" or "siddhi" as opposed to actual development of personal insight. Buddhism, in particular, has a great deal to say about the results of such an emphasis. In my opinion, it's an area to which Hubbard was apparently spiritually "blind".


Mark A. Baker
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Yes, it really does have a lot to say on that and I do think that's lacking in Scn. I love the emphasis Scn puts on theta and responsibility but there are things I feel I'm deriving from Buddhism that I didn't, really, from Scn.
 
Yes, it really does have a lot to say on that and I do think that's lacking in Scn. I love the emphasis Scn puts on theta and responsibility but there are things I feel I'm deriving from Buddhism that I didn't, really, from Scn.


Buddhist philosophy is an excellent complement to scientology practice. However, one should "look to source" (or rather "sources") on the Buddhist philosophy and NOT Hubbard or the Co$. :coolwink:


Mark A. Baker
 
Top