Vinaire
Sponsor
On this subject, let me first present a brief summary from TROM materials:
This quote from TROM, just in a few words, explained a lot to me.
.
Oh! God!!!
- Thread starter Vinaire
- Start date
On this subject, let me first present a brief summary from TROM materials:
This quote from TROM, just in a few words, explained a lot to me.
.
lkwdblds
Crusader
Hi - S & L
Sandly, nice to hear from you again. I have seen you posting on other threads but I did not have enough interest or knowledge there to respond to anything with a post. Its good to know that you also would like to hear Vinnie's take on Chakras. I see today that he is back posting here again after a lay off. With Gadfly and Vinnie both posting in the last couple of days this thread may be heating up again. All that is missing now is to hear from SP Bill.
Lakey
Hi Everybody, long time no see!
Yes, I would like to hear Vinnie's take on Chakras, too!
Sandly, nice to hear from you again. I have seen you posting on other threads but I did not have enough interest or knowledge there to respond to anything with a post. Its good to know that you also would like to hear Vinnie's take on Chakras. I see today that he is back posting here again after a lay off. With Gadfly and Vinnie both posting in the last couple of days this thread may be heating up again. All that is missing now is to hear from SP Bill.
Lakey
SweetnessandLight
Crusader
Maybe we should write him and give him a little invite?
lkwdblds
Crusader
Finishedman may be finished.
Finishedman who has posted here was a friend of mine who has worked with me for 24 years. He was posting on various religious and New Age websites and I started posting on ESMB in March of this year.
Finishedman always liked to talk to me about religious and philosophic topics when we went to lunch. He has two sources of knowledge which he subscribes to. First he is a Christian. He is in a very special Christian church, "The Church of Christ" founded in the Phillipines around 1911 buy a man who was previously a Catholic Priest and became disenchanted with Catholicsm. They often use their Spanish title, Iglesia del Cristo. This Church is very bible oriented, especially New Testament and they believe, as do so many others, that unless you are a member of their Church, you automatically will go to hell in the last days. They do not celebrate birthdays, Christmas and regular holidays but they don't mind if others want to celebrate these things. It is a nice group of people, probably over 80% Phillipinos and if I were attracted to Christianity, I would be a member there but I am not attracted to being a Christian but I respect them very much. By the way, FM is Caucasian but married a Filipino Church member and has 2 kids.
FM's other source of knowledge is U.G. Krishnamurti, who is a mystic from India who just died this year in his 80's. He is not to be confused with Jeddu Krishnamurti, a more mainstream Indian mystic. FM just would not stop spouting off about U.G.'s ideas to me at lunch. I did not like or agree with U.G. about 70% of the time and agreed maybe 30%.
When I began reading this thread, I encouraged FM to read some of Vin's material and some of the interesting and thought provoking replies. FM was never in Scientology but knew something about it from all the conversations which we had. When I disagreed on a Christian viewpoint or a U.G. viewpoint, I would give him my viewpoint, using Scientology, plus other things I had studied.
I am the one who brought FM to this board even though he was never in Scientology and never did any courses and never read a book on it. I naively believed that when FM read some of the things on this thread, he would learn something and perhaps ditch some of the crazy U.G. stuff that made no sense to me.
HOW NAIVE I WAS! I did not know or have any inkling that FM was completely rigid and unmoving in his approach to life. His style is just to TR3 the same message over and over, putting down other people's beliefs and hammering his own beliefs into people with iron. He is firmly convinced that his point of view is the only correct way to look at things and that all other talk about beliefs is a complete waste of time and just sinks people deeper into the muck.
HIS U.G. TEACHINGS AND HIS CHRISTIAN TEACHINGS TO ME SEEM DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED. HE SAYS THEY ARE NOT AND THAT HIS CHRISTIAN BELIEFS ARE NOT ALTERED BY FOLLOWING U.G.
I started to take FM on and challenge him on his U.G. beliefs. When this thread started talking about God and Brahma and what existed before the creation of this Universe, FM became very upset with me when I stated that I did not believe God should be spoken to on one's knees or through groveling or showing humbleness. After these remarks or mine, our relationship started to crumble. He feels that God is God Almighty of the new testament and must be bowed to.
To make a long story short, about 10 days ago FM and I broke up. I was not happy with the way he was doing his job and he finished his last job with me and I told him that I was no longer going to use him. This thread has seemed to be fading out anyway and now with me and FM no longer being friends maybe he will drop off from the discussions. I read here today that Vin just completed his vacation so I am hoping the thread will resume but I am also hoping that FM will no longer post here. At first he was interesting but he is out of step with most of the board members and just keeps repeating his same message and is not willing to examine ANY points of view other than his own as to merit and he is totally unwilling to change at all or to debate any of his assertions as to their merit. I hope he is gone from ESMB but with Finishedman one never knows. He told me twice that he would stop posting here and then changed his mind. Maybe some of you got somethings from his posts but I did not.
Lkwdblds
Finishedman who has posted here was a friend of mine who has worked with me for 24 years. He was posting on various religious and New Age websites and I started posting on ESMB in March of this year.
Finishedman always liked to talk to me about religious and philosophic topics when we went to lunch. He has two sources of knowledge which he subscribes to. First he is a Christian. He is in a very special Christian church, "The Church of Christ" founded in the Phillipines around 1911 buy a man who was previously a Catholic Priest and became disenchanted with Catholicsm. They often use their Spanish title, Iglesia del Cristo. This Church is very bible oriented, especially New Testament and they believe, as do so many others, that unless you are a member of their Church, you automatically will go to hell in the last days. They do not celebrate birthdays, Christmas and regular holidays but they don't mind if others want to celebrate these things. It is a nice group of people, probably over 80% Phillipinos and if I were attracted to Christianity, I would be a member there but I am not attracted to being a Christian but I respect them very much. By the way, FM is Caucasian but married a Filipino Church member and has 2 kids.
FM's other source of knowledge is U.G. Krishnamurti, who is a mystic from India who just died this year in his 80's. He is not to be confused with Jeddu Krishnamurti, a more mainstream Indian mystic. FM just would not stop spouting off about U.G.'s ideas to me at lunch. I did not like or agree with U.G. about 70% of the time and agreed maybe 30%.
When I began reading this thread, I encouraged FM to read some of Vin's material and some of the interesting and thought provoking replies. FM was never in Scientology but knew something about it from all the conversations which we had. When I disagreed on a Christian viewpoint or a U.G. viewpoint, I would give him my viewpoint, using Scientology, plus other things I had studied.
I am the one who brought FM to this board even though he was never in Scientology and never did any courses and never read a book on it. I naively believed that when FM read some of the things on this thread, he would learn something and perhaps ditch some of the crazy U.G. stuff that made no sense to me.
HOW NAIVE I WAS! I did not know or have any inkling that FM was completely rigid and unmoving in his approach to life. His style is just to TR3 the same message over and over, putting down other people's beliefs and hammering his own beliefs into people with iron. He is firmly convinced that his point of view is the only correct way to look at things and that all other talk about beliefs is a complete waste of time and just sinks people deeper into the muck.
HIS U.G. TEACHINGS AND HIS CHRISTIAN TEACHINGS TO ME SEEM DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED. HE SAYS THEY ARE NOT AND THAT HIS CHRISTIAN BELIEFS ARE NOT ALTERED BY FOLLOWING U.G.
I started to take FM on and challenge him on his U.G. beliefs. When this thread started talking about God and Brahma and what existed before the creation of this Universe, FM became very upset with me when I stated that I did not believe God should be spoken to on one's knees or through groveling or showing humbleness. After these remarks or mine, our relationship started to crumble. He feels that God is God Almighty of the new testament and must be bowed to.
To make a long story short, about 10 days ago FM and I broke up. I was not happy with the way he was doing his job and he finished his last job with me and I told him that I was no longer going to use him. This thread has seemed to be fading out anyway and now with me and FM no longer being friends maybe he will drop off from the discussions. I read here today that Vin just completed his vacation so I am hoping the thread will resume but I am also hoping that FM will no longer post here. At first he was interesting but he is out of step with most of the board members and just keeps repeating his same message and is not willing to examine ANY points of view other than his own as to merit and he is totally unwilling to change at all or to debate any of his assertions as to their merit. I hope he is gone from ESMB but with Finishedman one never knows. He told me twice that he would stop posting here and then changed his mind. Maybe some of you got somethings from his posts but I did not.
Lkwdblds
Vinaire
Sponsor
I don't think it is a matter of liking or not liking anyone's post. It is simply a matter of what one can learn from a discussion with someone.
If a discussion with someone is not proving to be worthwhile then one may simply not participate in it.
One's effort should not be change other people's minds. One's effort should be to present one's case as best as one can, and always be willing to learn from others.
.
If a discussion with someone is not proving to be worthwhile then one may simply not participate in it.
One's effort should not be change other people's minds. One's effort should be to present one's case as best as one can, and always be willing to learn from others.
.
lkwdblds
Crusader
Welcome back
Vinaire - Welcome back, I hope you had a lovely vacation! I don't have any problem with what you say above and always treated FM as you recommend one treat other posters as per above.
I just felt bad because I brought FM to the board and specifically to this thread and he was not really participating in the discussions here but simply seemed to be invalidating all viewpoints but his own and never really dialoging with any one but just using endless TR3 to repeat his message. I did not try and change his mind but I liked to find inconsistencies in his line of thought and point them out to him. I was looking for a discussion but he would ignore all the points I made and just preach the same thing again maybe with a slightly different twist to it.
I asked him why he would not dialogue or engage in any discussions and he said that as Finishedman, he would never do that because it is not part of the Finishedman valence or character.
Anyway, I did nothing to get him off this board, he can post here all he wants. I just think that the odds are that he will not post here any longer now that our friendship and business association has broken up. If I am wrong, then when he reads this, he may well continue posting here. More power to him! Its his decision and his alone.
Vinaire - Welcome back, I hope you had a lovely vacation! I don't have any problem with what you say above and always treated FM as you recommend one treat other posters as per above.
I just felt bad because I brought FM to the board and specifically to this thread and he was not really participating in the discussions here but simply seemed to be invalidating all viewpoints but his own and never really dialoging with any one but just using endless TR3 to repeat his message. I did not try and change his mind but I liked to find inconsistencies in his line of thought and point them out to him. I was looking for a discussion but he would ignore all the points I made and just preach the same thing again maybe with a slightly different twist to it.
I asked him why he would not dialogue or engage in any discussions and he said that as Finishedman, he would never do that because it is not part of the Finishedman valence or character.
Anyway, I did nothing to get him off this board, he can post here all he wants. I just think that the odds are that he will not post here any longer now that our friendship and business association has broken up. If I am wrong, then when he reads this, he may well continue posting here. More power to him! Its his decision and his alone.
Vinaire
Sponsor
Thank you. I am getting some interesting realizations on light... from the Bible of all places. Please see,
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=312429&postcount=51
By is very nature, light alter-ises whatever it reflects from. It is not designed to provide a full understanding (as-isness). It is there to provide just enough awareness, short of as-isness, so that creation can persist.
Thus, we have the Uncertainty Principle in atomic physics.
.
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=312429&postcount=51
By is very nature, light alter-ises whatever it reflects from. It is not designed to provide a full understanding (as-isness). It is there to provide just enough awareness, short of as-isness, so that creation can persist.
Thus, we have the Uncertainty Principle in atomic physics.
.
RogerB
Crusader
It's All Harmonics, My Dear
Vin,
Many moons ago, in a meeting with my first "guru," (1963-4) this subject came up.
The lady's name was Myra Louise. She was in her eighties when I met her. She was a healer who was using both the spiritual and herbal healing tech of the Maori "natives" of NZ who had saved her as a young, sickly girl, along with a tech called radiasthesia also known as radionics.
She used radiasthesia to detect the presence of toxic elements and/or chemical imbalances in the body. And she routinely healed the failed cases from conventional medicine.
One of the brilliant things she did was to figure out all of the harmonics of color (in the visible light spectrum) and the atomic elements of the periodic scale. She did this because she was then able to hold the appropriate colored piece of fabric (she herself created the exact dye colors to make the materials) to her radiasthesia pendulum when running tests on patients.
In discussing all this with her, I saw the relationship of the spectrum of light wavelengths and their colors not only as harmonics of the physical atomic and chemical elements, but also of the human/spiritual emotional "tone scale."
We had a great chat on this, and did a little work on lining it all up and spotting and using the relationships thereof.
As physicists know, atoms resonate to different light or EM wavelengths. That is, in accordance with this relationship of harmonics of EM wavelength to matter, the "light" is either absorbed or reflected. Conversely, when heated the elements give off their particular EM harmonic spectrum.
My observation at a spiritual level is that our "spiritual" mood or emotion level also reciprocates with, affects and is affected by these aspects of the physical world in the form of "light" and matter. What we emanate is a harmonic of these aspects of existence.
Rog
Vin,
Many moons ago, in a meeting with my first "guru," (1963-4) this subject came up.
The lady's name was Myra Louise. She was in her eighties when I met her. She was a healer who was using both the spiritual and herbal healing tech of the Maori "natives" of NZ who had saved her as a young, sickly girl, along with a tech called radiasthesia also known as radionics.
She used radiasthesia to detect the presence of toxic elements and/or chemical imbalances in the body. And she routinely healed the failed cases from conventional medicine.
One of the brilliant things she did was to figure out all of the harmonics of color (in the visible light spectrum) and the atomic elements of the periodic scale. She did this because she was then able to hold the appropriate colored piece of fabric (she herself created the exact dye colors to make the materials) to her radiasthesia pendulum when running tests on patients.
In discussing all this with her, I saw the relationship of the spectrum of light wavelengths and their colors not only as harmonics of the physical atomic and chemical elements, but also of the human/spiritual emotional "tone scale."
We had a great chat on this, and did a little work on lining it all up and spotting and using the relationships thereof.
As physicists know, atoms resonate to different light or EM wavelengths. That is, in accordance with this relationship of harmonics of EM wavelength to matter, the "light" is either absorbed or reflected. Conversely, when heated the elements give off their particular EM harmonic spectrum.
My observation at a spiritual level is that our "spiritual" mood or emotion level also reciprocates with, affects and is affected by these aspects of the physical world in the form of "light" and matter. What we emanate is a harmonic of these aspects of existence.
Rog
Last edited:
lkwdblds
Crusader
Use of the word "Designed"
Vin - I like the way you just causually used the word "designed" here and also provided one of the key purposes for light. There is so much controversy between "creationist" and the "all is random movement of matter" people and you sidestepped all that by the efficient use of a single word.
When light is being discussed, it seems intuitively that one is focusing very near to the initial as-isness which created something.
Your comments made me think about the other four sense channels of the human body (not Hubbard's 57 channels of perception). Is there something designed for touch, hearing, smell and taste which is there to provide just enought awareness, short of as-isness, so that creation can persist?
Certainly, things could be touched, heard, smelled and tasted in pitch black darkness with no light. It seems as if taste and smell tend to require some sort of living brew of chemicals to exist before those sensations can be experienced. For a living brew to exist, light would first have to be present. However, it is conceivable that inert materials could be tasted and smelled without the prior existence of light.
Touch and sound seem to be the two "senior" perceptics with touch being senior to sound. The sensation of touch could be experienced on its own without light. Sound could also be experienced without light but there has to be a gaseous medium existing for sound to vibrate in. Still I believe that gaseous medium could come into existence without light.
These side comments on four other perceptic channels are interesting but I think further discussion of the purposes and properties in light is currently the main topic of discussion.
Lakey
Vin - I like the way you just causually used the word "designed" here and also provided one of the key purposes for light. There is so much controversy between "creationist" and the "all is random movement of matter" people and you sidestepped all that by the efficient use of a single word.
When light is being discussed, it seems intuitively that one is focusing very near to the initial as-isness which created something.
Your comments made me think about the other four sense channels of the human body (not Hubbard's 57 channels of perception). Is there something designed for touch, hearing, smell and taste which is there to provide just enought awareness, short of as-isness, so that creation can persist?
Certainly, things could be touched, heard, smelled and tasted in pitch black darkness with no light. It seems as if taste and smell tend to require some sort of living brew of chemicals to exist before those sensations can be experienced. For a living brew to exist, light would first have to be present. However, it is conceivable that inert materials could be tasted and smelled without the prior existence of light.
Touch and sound seem to be the two "senior" perceptics with touch being senior to sound. The sensation of touch could be experienced on its own without light. Sound could also be experienced without light but there has to be a gaseous medium existing for sound to vibrate in. Still I believe that gaseous medium could come into existence without light.
These side comments on four other perceptic channels are interesting but I think further discussion of the purposes and properties in light is currently the main topic of discussion.
Lakey
lkwdblds
Crusader
Parallels between physical and spiritual universes
Nice summary in your last paragraph. Didn't Hubbard and probably others hypothisize that for every physical universe manifestation of matter, energy, space and time there was a companion manifestation in the spiritual or "theta" universe. As to working out these relationships in detail, this seems like it would be a very fruitful field of analysis which would help us understand our lives and our place in the physical universe better. Apparently, you have done some of your own investigation in this arena on your own and people such as you former guru have done even more detailed studies. Do you know of any references an uniformed person could look to to find out more?
Lakey
Nice summary in your last paragraph. Didn't Hubbard and probably others hypothisize that for every physical universe manifestation of matter, energy, space and time there was a companion manifestation in the spiritual or "theta" universe. As to working out these relationships in detail, this seems like it would be a very fruitful field of analysis which would help us understand our lives and our place in the physical universe better. Apparently, you have done some of your own investigation in this arena on your own and people such as you former guru have done even more detailed studies. Do you know of any references an uniformed person could look to to find out more?
Lakey
Vinaire
Sponsor
This is a very interesting area, but I hardly know anything about it. Interaction of light with matter seems to be complex.
The surface electrons get excited with the incident light and then get de-excited to emit/reflect light. How that light than interacts with the lens, retina and nerves of the eye to pass the information from the object to the brain is not very clear to me.
At some level this interaction seems to be so precise that it is amazing.
.
nexus100
Gold Meritorious Patron
I don't believe there are separate spiritual and physical universes. Individual perception determines what we see and create. Perception broadens into more conscious create, or "shrinks" into less conscious create. Therefore the key to "working out" any relationship is understanding more through whatever means extends perception. For me, this means consciously moving into spaces I don't presently understand, and seeing. Conscious creation follows and with that comes understanding.
SweetnessandLight
Crusader
Still here!
I'm with you, Nexy! Well said. I see an integrated whole, no separation.
As an artist, I have my own take on light and it's uses, as well as the spiritual meaning, which corresponds to wisdom, insight or understanding, the ability to look, to see and create...
I'm with you, Nexy! Well said. I see an integrated whole, no separation.
As an artist, I have my own take on light and it's uses, as well as the spiritual meaning, which corresponds to wisdom, insight or understanding, the ability to look, to see and create...
Last edited:
Vinaire
Sponsor
Yes, we are the SOURCE as well as the OBSERVER of creation, which I have discussed in some detail on the BIBLE thread. The creation out there may be looked upon as both physical and spiritual. The game for most of us has been to convert the unconscious create back to conscious create.
By the way, Nexus, I got your book... the ultra, ultra edition.
.
SweetnessandLight
Crusader
Nexy, there's an Ultra edition? :confused2:
Vinaire
Sponsor
By "ultra, ultra edition," I meant the fanciest print and compilation (hard cover) of Nexus' book.
.
SweetnessandLight
Crusader
Oh, thanks, I got it!
lkwdblds
Crusader
I am not sure if we disagree or not.
I am not sure if I disagree with your first sentence of if it is just a matter of semantics or choice of words. By physical universe, I am refering to the universe of matter, energy, space and time. To me, the universe of theta does not contain these elements. For example, I know matter is an illusion which must contain a lie for it to persist. Often, misassignment of who the creator of the matter is constitutes the lie. Also, the passage of time is an illusion and I as a spirit do not contain matter or move through time. This is why I used the two terms physical and spiritual as if they are different universes.
I can see that the two combined can be considered as two separate parts of a unified universe. In this sense it can all be called one universe but the two terms would have to signify different components of one universe for me to be in accord with the opening sentence of your post.
In a unified universe containing these two components, the two components could shift around with respect to each other and extensions of perception could cause the boundaries between the two components to lessen while shrinkage of perception would strengthen the boundaries between the two and make them more solid.
If perception shrunk to almost nothing, the two components of the universe would, in the mind of the observer, beccome two separate universes and ultimately the spiritual component of the two universes would be written off as not existing and being mere superstition while the physical component would constitute the entire universe. If perception was extended far enough, the barriers between the two components would be perceived as ceasing to exist and the universe would be one unified whole as you suggest it is. Does this concept align with yours or do you mean something different?
Lkwdblds
I am not sure if I disagree with your first sentence of if it is just a matter of semantics or choice of words. By physical universe, I am refering to the universe of matter, energy, space and time. To me, the universe of theta does not contain these elements. For example, I know matter is an illusion which must contain a lie for it to persist. Often, misassignment of who the creator of the matter is constitutes the lie. Also, the passage of time is an illusion and I as a spirit do not contain matter or move through time. This is why I used the two terms physical and spiritual as if they are different universes.
I can see that the two combined can be considered as two separate parts of a unified universe. In this sense it can all be called one universe but the two terms would have to signify different components of one universe for me to be in accord with the opening sentence of your post.
In a unified universe containing these two components, the two components could shift around with respect to each other and extensions of perception could cause the boundaries between the two components to lessen while shrinkage of perception would strengthen the boundaries between the two and make them more solid.
If perception shrunk to almost nothing, the two components of the universe would, in the mind of the observer, beccome two separate universes and ultimately the spiritual component of the two universes would be written off as not existing and being mere superstition while the physical component would constitute the entire universe. If perception was extended far enough, the barriers between the two components would be perceived as ceasing to exist and the universe would be one unified whole as you suggest it is. Does this concept align with yours or do you mean something different?
Lkwdblds
nexus100
Gold Meritorious Patron
Wow. I wish that had been in print so I could have stolen it before I wrote the book.
All I mean is that there is no practical reason to consider there is any universal operation in place except look/create. That is the whole story of this place and every single thing in it. We all create other realities, of course.
I really appreciate your description, no smoke, I never would have put it that way.
nexus100
Gold Meritorious Patron
Yes, we are the SOURCE as well as the OBSERVER of creation, which I have discussed in some detail on the BIBLE thread. The creation out there may be looked upon as both physical and spiritual. The game for most of us has been to convert the unconscious create back to conscious create.
By the way, Nexus, I got your book... the ultra, ultra edition.
.
Thank you Vinaire. You have no idea how great a compliment you have offered to me.
Similar threads
