RogerB
Crusader
Or, maybe, "straight the gait" . . . . . as in how correct and true the walk . . . . time to take a pick on which it is
R
The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But
- Thread starter lkwdblds
- Start date
- Status
Or, maybe, "straight the gait" . . . . . as in how correct and true the walk . . . . time to take a pick on which it is
R
RogerB
Crusader
On Time
All this talk about "time" got me reviewing my current view of it.
My view of it has been for quite some time now that: Time is the consideration that conditions will be and events will occur.
Of course, the moment this consideration is projected there is brought into being the limitations it imposes. And then, in accordance with those limitations, one can consider oneself to be located . . . and hence the notions of past, present and future location.
Historically, my view is that the above consideration was the first in the sequence regarding time. It brought into being a future from out of an original continuum of existence that exhibited no "time delineation." It was simply all "now."
Following the bringing into being of the will be "future," one could view conditions and events from that position and consider comparative events as "past." And so it goes
Hmmm, and an interesting concept to process it is too, for one can span the whole extravaganza!
RogerB
All this talk about "time" got me reviewing my current view of it.
My view of it has been for quite some time now that: Time is the consideration that conditions will be and events will occur.
Of course, the moment this consideration is projected there is brought into being the limitations it imposes.
And then, in accordance with those limitations, one can consider oneself to be located . . . and hence the notions of past, present and future location.Historically, my view is that the above consideration was the first in the sequence regarding time. It brought into being a future from out of an original continuum of existence that exhibited no "time delineation." It was simply all "now."
Following the bringing into being of the will be "future," one could view conditions and events from that position and consider comparative events as "past." And so it goes
Hmmm, and an interesting concept to process it is too, for one can span the whole extravaganza!
RogerB
EP - Ethics Particle
Gold Meritorious Patron
Provocative and productive post, hats!
This got me a "flash" of some sort involving the idea of "blowing" BTs/clusters/pressure/pain/sen and all that kind of thing...
(note that I have not done any upper level stuff)
But the general thought was that to eliminate, disperse, eject... whatever you might call the "negative gain" part of the processes :confused2: could possibly be doing away with or altering and messing up the nodes, comnnections, entities and what-not that binds the whole composite being that comprises and individual together.
So, consider that perchance a "cluster" (or similar) is actually a sort of protective node containing some set or sets of encoded instructions accumulated on the "time track" that is keeping cell growth on track and replicating appropriately... well, removing it might possibly allow unchecked and unregulated proliferation of said cells.
Ergo - cancer. :confused2:
Excuse me if this seems silly, puerile or repeats thoughts previously advanced - I just wanted to get it out of my universe before it totally "as-ises"
EP
Tonight I was watching Charlie Rose. The Brain Series #4. The whole group seemed to be from Columbia University except one. They were on the subject of the plasticity of the brain and examining ALS....or at least attempting to. There seems to be a one to three month window where you can diagnose and work with stem cells before they format into some definitive neorological function. I did not know that stem cells are not encoded yet as to what part of the body they will be controlling and have not yet been scripted as a this or a that. They are a blank slate so to speak. Pure potential. This totally blew my mind.My mind went wandering over the NOTS technique. Then it went wandering over the supposed wall of fire charges left imprinted on genetics. The one area seems to be maleable and the other is so very compressed that if you guishsed it...it seems so super perma pressed into its codes that it springs right back into its platform shapes.
This got me a "flash" of some sort involving the idea of "blowing" BTs/clusters/pressure/pain/sen and all that kind of thing...
(note that I have not done any upper level stuff)
But the general thought was that to eliminate, disperse, eject... whatever you might call the "negative gain" part of the processes :confused2: could possibly be doing away with or altering and messing up the nodes, comnnections, entities and what-not that binds the whole composite being that comprises and individual together.
So, consider that perchance a "cluster" (or similar) is actually a sort of protective node containing some set or sets of encoded instructions accumulated on the "time track" that is keeping cell growth on track and replicating appropriately... well, removing it might possibly allow unchecked and unregulated proliferation of said cells.
Ergo - cancer. :confused2:
Excuse me if this seems silly, puerile or repeats thoughts previously advanced - I just wanted to get it out of my universe before it totally "as-ises"
EP
lkwdblds
Crusader
This is a nice clean look at time.
Thanks Roger, this is a nice, clean look at "time". Another look might be more typical of the way many beings look at it which would be that they view something and then the something changes. It might be simillar to a child looking into one of those toy kaledeiscopes that form geometric paterns. As one rotates the scope, the observer notes first one pattern and then a second pattern. Something changed, time has passed.
A nice thing about your construct is that the being makes a consideration first and creates a construct; this dovetails nicely with what Johnny was saying last night about present time being what you consider it to be. In the first example, a being is more the effect of time and it has more mystery in it because all one does is look at something and if there is a change of form or position time has passed.
TWO KEY POINTS ABOUT TIME:
#1. How about the duration of the present? How long does the present last? This concept was rampant in ancient Greece in discussions about the exact location and velocity of a moving arrow. The best resolution of this concept is to introduce the calculus concept of a "delta t", an incremental width of instantaneous time. From what I know Leibnitz and Newton worked with this theory at the same time, late 17th century, and co-developed Calculus without knowing of the work of the other researcher. The increment is allowed to get smaller and smaller without limit and tends towards zero. This process leads to a continuous function with no gaps but only a smooth continuous flow.
Though this type of time flow might have been considered and constructed, it apparently wasn't done that way for this Physical Universe we are inhabiting. In this universe, time appears to be quantized in discrete chunks; i.e. Hubbard's description of ta pocketa, ta pocketa as opposed to a smooth function's hmmmmmmmmmm.
#2. This has to do with whether the future controls the past or the past comes first. It can be viewed either way. For example, in talking about cause and effect, the commonly held approach is that one sees something, say a mountain range, and tries to figure out how that was caused thus putting cause in the past. Another look at it could be to consider cause to lie in the future as early mankind was forced to do, i.e. early man would say, winter is setting in, I better go hunting NOW so as to have some food in storage LATER after winter sets in so I and my clan won't starve to death.
This same type of reasoning can be applied to time. I prefer your model strongly because it starts with a being knowingly making a consideration of the future and from that construct, the past comes into being. Less mystery, less "being the effect of" in your way of looking at it.
Lakey
All this talk about "time" got me reviewing my current view of it.
My view of it has been for quite some time now that: Time is the consideration that conditions will be and events will occur.
Of course, the moment this consideration is projected there is brought into being the limitations it imposes.
Historically, my view is that the above consideration was the first in the sequence regarding time. It brought into being a future from out of an original continuum of existence that exhibited no "time delineation." It was simply all "now."
Following the bringing into being of the will be "future," one could view conditions and events from that position and consider comparative events as "past." And so it goes
Hmmm, and an interesting concept to process it is too, for one can span the whole extravaganza!
RogerB
Thanks Roger, this is a nice, clean look at "time". Another look might be more typical of the way many beings look at it which would be that they view something and then the something changes. It might be simillar to a child looking into one of those toy kaledeiscopes that form geometric paterns. As one rotates the scope, the observer notes first one pattern and then a second pattern. Something changed, time has passed.
A nice thing about your construct is that the being makes a consideration first and creates a construct; this dovetails nicely with what Johnny was saying last night about present time being what you consider it to be. In the first example, a being is more the effect of time and it has more mystery in it because all one does is look at something and if there is a change of form or position time has passed.
TWO KEY POINTS ABOUT TIME:
#1. How about the duration of the present? How long does the present last? This concept was rampant in ancient Greece in discussions about the exact location and velocity of a moving arrow. The best resolution of this concept is to introduce the calculus concept of a "delta t", an incremental width of instantaneous time. From what I know Leibnitz and Newton worked with this theory at the same time, late 17th century, and co-developed Calculus without knowing of the work of the other researcher. The increment is allowed to get smaller and smaller without limit and tends towards zero. This process leads to a continuous function with no gaps but only a smooth continuous flow.
Though this type of time flow might have been considered and constructed, it apparently wasn't done that way for this Physical Universe we are inhabiting. In this universe, time appears to be quantized in discrete chunks; i.e. Hubbard's description of ta pocketa, ta pocketa as opposed to a smooth function's hmmmmmmmmmm.
#2. This has to do with whether the future controls the past or the past comes first. It can be viewed either way. For example, in talking about cause and effect, the commonly held approach is that one sees something, say a mountain range, and tries to figure out how that was caused thus putting cause in the past. Another look at it could be to consider cause to lie in the future as early mankind was forced to do, i.e. early man would say, winter is setting in, I better go hunting NOW so as to have some food in storage LATER after winter sets in so I and my clan won't starve to death.
This same type of reasoning can be applied to time. I prefer your model strongly because it starts with a being knowingly making a consideration of the future and from that construct, the past comes into being. Less mystery, less "being the effect of" in your way of looking at it.
Lakey
Last edited:
CarmeloOrchards
Crusader
Having done OT3 back in 1973, I would say that you are right on track.
I finished OT3 and felt sooooo lonesome. OT3 is nothing that I would recommend to my worst enemy. Getting rid of your helper beings, spiritual teammates, guardian angels or whatever you want to call them is really stupid.
I finished OT3 and felt sooooo lonesome. OT3 is nothing that I would recommend to my worst enemy. Getting rid of your helper beings, spiritual teammates, guardian angels or whatever you want to call them is really stupid.
This got me a "flash" of some sort involving the idea of "blowing" BTs/clusters/pressure/pain/sen and all that kind of thing...
(note that I have not done any upper level stuff)
But the general thought was that to eliminate, disperse, eject... whatever you might call the "negative gain" part of the processes :confused2: could possibly be doing away with or altering and messing up the nodes, comnnections, entities and what-not that binds the whole composite being that comprises and individual together.
So, consider that perchance a "cluster" (or similar) is actually a sort of protective node containing some set or sets of encoded instructions accumulated on the "time track" that is keeping cell growth on track and replicating appropriately... well, removing it might possibly allow unchecked and unregulated proliferation of said cells.
Ergo - cancer. :confused2:
Excuse me if this seems silly, puerile or repeats thoughts previously advanced - I just wanted to get it out of my universe before it totally "as-ises"
EP
Ted
Gold Meritorious Patron
Just a random thought here prompted by your post above:
If you accept axiom 1 as having any truth, you would then see that in a most fundamental sense, my "here" is your "here" is another's "here." Our apparent separateness comes from power of choice on where we place our attention. By the time we get down to physical universe, there are multiplicities of attention placements. This adds greatly to the illusion of separateness.
As for BT, you do not actually get rid of them, you are only made to believe that you do. It is from that mistaken belief that a being gets the illusion of disconnection. Loneliness would be a very real perception following that belief and illusion.
Actual separation is more along the lines of charge, disagreement, and BPC. I think that most of us would find that separation perfectly acceptable.
When auditing BTs and clusters the only thing removed is the blockage and fixed attention. BT and cluster is the downgrading, scientology term for any other being that has stuck attention, particularly attention on that thing you are calling "your" body.
Enthetan
Master of Disaster
The objective is to make money. Some people make money in ways that result in others losing money. That's how the game goes.
In pharmaceuticals, you don't make money unless you can patent the stuff. Otherwise, after you've done all the research on the effectiveness of the stuff, somebody else can just sell the stuff, referencing your research. That's why the medical establishment is not into vitamins, herbs, and nutrition. If a natural substance is found which cures disease, it's not interesting until the active chemical can be synthesized (and thus patented).
In the energy game, we have competing interests. The oil companies want us to consume more energy. The car companies compete on who can deliver the best miles-per-gallon rating for a given amount of power and size. This is why I think the "magic carburetor" stuff is bullshit. SOMEBODY, SOMEWHERE in the world would have exploited it. Wars are won or lost by logistics, the ability to transport men, ammo and supplies over long distances. An innovation that extended the range of a military truck even a few percent would have large strategic implications, and you are not going to keep the fact that it exists a secret when you have tens of thousands of soldiers working on vehicles.
Veda
Sponsor
I notice that Gwen Olsen is also on the board of the Citizen's Commission on Human Rights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12PzVMu0Iis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12PzVMu0Iis
Ted
Gold Meritorious Patron
Hubbard and scientology have been hijacking and piggy-backing for years trying to gain some semblance of respectability and authority.
Veda
Sponsor
Or maybe Scientology really isn't a cult. Maybe we've been tricked by black propaganda from the pharmaceutical industry. Maybe there's nothing really wrong with Scientology (and for Indies and FZers) except that it's been altered, and is not being applied correctly, ya know, 'cause of Miscavige...
Oops. Too late. You guys have already moved on to the next level and are channelling Hubbard directly.
(Just kidding.)
lkwdblds
Crusader
I believe the theory of BT's is......
Consider a large airliner going down loaded with previously happy passengers and crew. Suddenly a festive party of vacationers finds out they will be experiencing an untimely death. In each individual, many things will be turning on, some will go out screaming in fear, some will be stoic, some will focus on saying goodbye to their loved ones, etc. Suddenly there is a huge impact and it is all over. Now, these 250 beings share this huge incident with fear of death, impact and body death.
Someone gets into Scientology or some other practice which takes up this kind of thing. Say a Scientologist got a good session from a competent auditor and ran out this incident from his own point of view. The crash is not going to be handled since the other 249 individual people do not run the incident. NOTs was an attempt to handle everyone who particpated in the incident.
I believe the above remarks from Carmelo, EP, Enthetan and Ted are well founded. This type of auditing was originally aptly named, New Era Dianetics for "OT's". It is not in any way an OT level and was made an OT level (in the process getting rid of the existing and proper more true OT levels). This is Dianetic auditing for people who know that other entities may be active or inactive in their spaces.
ERROR NUMBER 1 - Misnaming the process AS an OT level was done only for economic reasons and perfectly good "OT Levels" were degraded and eliminated unnecessarily in a bold and ill conceived attempt to drastically increase gross income!
ERROR NUMBER 2 - Everything that a person could spot was indiscrimantly run out regarless of what it was. Hence the lonely feeling of Carmelo. Some of the life active in a person's space is apparently beneficial to a being. Their are angels and spiritual teammates, guards, sentries, look out posts and various other helpful systems which are attached to beings. A lot of this is workable and enhances a being and should have been left alone.
Just look at the people who have been on NOTs 7 years, 10 years, 12 years, are they totally on top of their game? They have never impressed me as something to aspire to as a group or individually. They were all inhibited from excelling in their own rights due to C of S restrictions censoring all of their activittes and LRH's mandate that there would be no seconds in command and that no other being could grab off a piece of the Scientology limelight.
SUMMARY There was nothing wrong with LRH and Mayo co developing NOTs as a process. The process is not an OT level and should have just retained its name as Dianetics, but Dianetics for those who knew of the concept of the complexity of a being. Finally, the process should have been run sporadically as needed not run indescrimantently on every single thing that reads in a person's space. Here again it is not rocket science and is simple common sense but the eagerness of C of S management to milk this "Cash Cow" has in effect, destroyed Scientology tech. As is often true, violatation of Hubbard's KSW policies brings down the tech of Scientology and crashes the Orgs. Hubbard and later, Int Management believed they were exempt from the application of these rules and violated KSW right and left, temporarily reaping high income statistics for a limited number of years. In the long run, however, their misdeeds have come home to roost and as predicted by their very own Policies, they have brought themselves to the edge of technical ruin.
Lakey
Consider a large airliner going down loaded with previously happy passengers and crew. Suddenly a festive party of vacationers finds out they will be experiencing an untimely death. In each individual, many things will be turning on, some will go out screaming in fear, some will be stoic, some will focus on saying goodbye to their loved ones, etc. Suddenly there is a huge impact and it is all over. Now, these 250 beings share this huge incident with fear of death, impact and body death.
Someone gets into Scientology or some other practice which takes up this kind of thing. Say a Scientologist got a good session from a competent auditor and ran out this incident from his own point of view. The crash is not going to be handled since the other 249 individual people do not run the incident. NOTs was an attempt to handle everyone who particpated in the incident.
I believe the above remarks from Carmelo, EP, Enthetan and Ted are well founded. This type of auditing was originally aptly named, New Era Dianetics for "OT's". It is not in any way an OT level and was made an OT level (in the process getting rid of the existing and proper more true OT levels). This is Dianetic auditing for people who know that other entities may be active or inactive in their spaces.
ERROR NUMBER 1 - Misnaming the process AS an OT level was done only for economic reasons and perfectly good "OT Levels" were degraded and eliminated unnecessarily in a bold and ill conceived attempt to drastically increase gross income!
ERROR NUMBER 2 - Everything that a person could spot was indiscrimantly run out regarless of what it was. Hence the lonely feeling of Carmelo. Some of the life active in a person's space is apparently beneficial to a being. Their are angels and spiritual teammates, guards, sentries, look out posts and various other helpful systems which are attached to beings. A lot of this is workable and enhances a being and should have been left alone.
Just look at the people who have been on NOTs 7 years, 10 years, 12 years, are they totally on top of their game? They have never impressed me as something to aspire to as a group or individually. They were all inhibited from excelling in their own rights due to C of S restrictions censoring all of their activittes and LRH's mandate that there would be no seconds in command and that no other being could grab off a piece of the Scientology limelight.
SUMMARY There was nothing wrong with LRH and Mayo co developing NOTs as a process. The process is not an OT level and should have just retained its name as Dianetics, but Dianetics for those who knew of the concept of the complexity of a being. Finally, the process should have been run sporadically as needed not run indescrimantently on every single thing that reads in a person's space. Here again it is not rocket science and is simple common sense but the eagerness of C of S management to milk this "Cash Cow" has in effect, destroyed Scientology tech. As is often true, violatation of Hubbard's KSW policies brings down the tech of Scientology and crashes the Orgs. Hubbard and later, Int Management believed they were exempt from the application of these rules and violated KSW right and left, temporarily reaping high income statistics for a limited number of years. In the long run, however, their misdeeds have come home to roost and as predicted by their very own Policies, they have brought themselves to the edge of technical ruin.
Lakey
Last edited:
RogerB
Crusader
On this subject above about accumulating the case of others and/or having to run others' incidents in a putative mutual incident, there was a very, very good thread started by Mate titled " How Dangerous is New OTVII (Solo NOTs)"
here: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=16109
I chirped in here on post #135, page 14.
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=16109&page=14
R
here: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=16109
I chirped in here on post #135, page 14.
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=16109&page=14
R
Enthetan
Master of Disaster
You got it. Bottom line: if you increase ability, then you will prosper. If you do not increase ability, as objectively demonstrated by the ability to make money and make things happen, then you will not prosper. I have not seen objectively demonstrable increase of ability from NOTs, which is the main reason I had put off doing Solo NOTs for so many years, until finally I walked away as management become increasingly crazy.
The originally-stated purpose of inserting NOTs was that the abilities gained by the old upper OT levels were not stable. OK, then. So stick in NOTs as OT3-super-expanded, and then see how people did on the old upper OT levels, and whether that objectively increased ability. Didn't happen.
Now Flag has milked their OT VII's as much as they can, and are looking at the abyss. Bringing in Louis Farrakhan will not save them.
lkwdblds
Crusader
Excellent post!
Well, Enthetan, you and I are in lock step on this issue! I still do not see how Farrakhan will be brought under the C of S umbrella. He just has an enormous obstacle to overcome and that is that Hubbard was white and that DM is white plus nearly all top management and developers of tech have been white. There were and are black respresentatives of Scientology but it seems to me that their percentage in society, about 12% of the population (1 out of 8) is not maintained in the Orgs. I think having a major black group enter Scientology en masse would normally benefit Scientology but I don't know about NOI, it is such a controversial group. The publicity generated would be very large and NOI probably brings a lot of money into C of S as well.
If NOI members took cetain Scientology courses, there might be good benefits. I am think of things such and the Stident Hat and the Data Evaluator's course. What are they going to do with stuff such as the Code of Honor and the Code of a Scientologist? NOI already has their own codes and they are quite different from C of Ses.
I consider myself pretty resourceful but if NOI contacted me and wanted to pay me to figure out a way to get around Hubbard's whiteness so as to make the subject more palatable with NOI teachings, I would probably be at a total loss to come up with anything effective. One knows some AD HOC type of construct would have to be made. It would have to be pretty wild.
Perhaps, Elijah Mohammed wrote a secret bulletin near the end of his life instructing his followers to learn a controversial white man's technology preparatory to taking over from the white man. Farrakhan could state that a panel of Black scholars will be assigned to modity the white technology to adapt it to NOI's uses. They could get really creative and say that Hubbard decended from a Black family way back on his family tree but I doubt if a really far out approach such as that would "sell in Peoria". I can't imagine how they are going to merge a white man's religious teachings into their own teachings and make it sound plausible. It will be very interesting as well as entertaining to see how they address these problems.
Lakey
Well, Enthetan, you and I are in lock step on this issue! I still do not see how Farrakhan will be brought under the C of S umbrella. He just has an enormous obstacle to overcome and that is that Hubbard was white and that DM is white plus nearly all top management and developers of tech have been white. There were and are black respresentatives of Scientology but it seems to me that their percentage in society, about 12% of the population (1 out of 8) is not maintained in the Orgs. I think having a major black group enter Scientology en masse would normally benefit Scientology but I don't know about NOI, it is such a controversial group. The publicity generated would be very large and NOI probably brings a lot of money into C of S as well.
If NOI members took cetain Scientology courses, there might be good benefits. I am think of things such and the Stident Hat and the Data Evaluator's course. What are they going to do with stuff such as the Code of Honor and the Code of a Scientologist? NOI already has their own codes and they are quite different from C of Ses.
I consider myself pretty resourceful but if NOI contacted me and wanted to pay me to figure out a way to get around Hubbard's whiteness so as to make the subject more palatable with NOI teachings, I would probably be at a total loss to come up with anything effective. One knows some AD HOC type of construct would have to be made. It would have to be pretty wild.
Perhaps, Elijah Mohammed wrote a secret bulletin near the end of his life instructing his followers to learn a controversial white man's technology preparatory to taking over from the white man. Farrakhan could state that a panel of Black scholars will be assigned to modity the white technology to adapt it to NOI's uses. They could get really creative and say that Hubbard decended from a Black family way back on his family tree but I doubt if a really far out approach such as that would "sell in Peoria". I can't imagine how they are going to merge a white man's religious teachings into their own teachings and make it sound plausible. It will be very interesting as well as entertaining to see how they address these problems.
Lakey
Last edited:
Enthetan
Master of Disaster
Nation of Islam claims their teachings came from a man named Wallace Fard. Fard was a white guy (or more accurately, from Afghanistan). It's therefore not necessarily required that a source of wisdom be black.
Past lives might introduce the idea that LRH was a black guy in a prior life, and came back as a white guy to make things easier on himself.
The Magic Thetan
Patron with Honors
What am I???
Once again I met this morning for "Breakfast with Hal", a twenty year tradition of meeting with my good friend Hal Seyle, an "Old Timer" Scientologist from the fifties, who had, like me, gone off to explore other avenues such as 
the alien Bashar (Bashar.com) and the Law of Attraction works of Abraham. (Abraham-Hicks.com)
This day I began by sharing some of Ikwdblds post # 5389 where he so beautifully addressed my thoughts on the nature of thetans and present time.
As I began to explore in greater debt the idea that things were what I considered and defined them to be, I was delighted to experience that I was nothing. I was unlimited potential, but I was not a thing. I was not a body, a mind, a thetan, an idea, a concept, a construct of some sort or an object. I was simply the potential to be or not be anything. I was delighted to FEEL this as a visceral experience.
However, the moment I considered myself to be a thetan, I felt myself being one. The moment I considered myself to be a complex construct of trillions programed and un-programed cells,I FELT really complex. This complexity was enjoyable when I considered it was, neutral when I had no thought about it, and negative when I had thoughts like, "Now I am going to have to deal with this complex mass of stuff."
"Knowest Thou the Meaning of Potential?"
Yes I think I do, for I am experiencing myself to be nothing or something as a direct reflection of what I consider.
With regards to time, I have been blessed with so many experiences on this subject, it seems like it will take "A Long Time" for me to delineate them all in my Johnny Raff Chronicles.
In my book "An Invitation to WonderWorld" there is a chapter entitled, "Adventures in Time". It tells the story of Barbara and I experiencing many "hours of time" when we only had "20 minutes" to be back on course. 
(I would by the way love it if you choose to support the project by getting and reading that book. It's available through my continually updated web site at wonderworldonline.com)
After my insistence on re-doing OT-II, (after having been enticed off of it because someone considered I needed to do OT-III), I experienced the physical universe flickering on and of like a show running motion picture camera. It was there, then not there, then there, then not there, and I got to personally and directly experience it being created moment to moment to moment.
Then I had an experience of simultaneous time, in which I was blessed with the awareness of everything being created in the now. Talk about an expansive view of "present time". After that, I returned to the habitual, human practice, of selecting a tiny portion of all that is, that I then strung out in a linear time stream. I then defined my instantaneous creation of A LINEAR TIME STREAM to be my multi-life history, and thus it was, until I considered it was something else.
:mindblow: Later I discovered that, I was a nothing that had unlimited potential, and everything was as I considered or defined it to be.
"Knowest Thou the Meaning of Potential?"
Well it seems like I am beginning to know, yet I consider there is much more to know, and so there is, except for "The Times" when I consider there is not.
Love, The Magic Thetan.
Once again I met this morning for "Breakfast with Hal", a twenty year tradition of meeting with my good friend Hal Seyle, an "Old Timer" Scientologist from the fifties, who had, like me, gone off to explore other avenues such as the alien Bashar (Bashar.com) and the Law of Attraction works of Abraham. (Abraham-Hicks.com) This day I began by sharing some of Ikwdblds post # 5389 where he so beautifully addressed my thoughts on the nature of thetans and present time.
As I began to explore in greater debt the idea that things were what I considered and defined them to be, I was delighted to experience that I was nothing. I was unlimited potential, but I was not a thing. I was not a body, a mind, a thetan, an idea, a concept, a construct of some sort or an object. I was simply the potential to be or not be anything. I was delighted to FEEL this as a visceral experience. However, the moment I considered myself to be a thetan, I felt myself being one. The moment I considered myself to be a complex construct of trillions programed and un-programed cells,I FELT really complex. This complexity was enjoyable when I considered it was, neutral when I had no thought about it, and negative when I had thoughts like, "Now I am going to have to deal with this complex mass of stuff."
"Knowest Thou the Meaning of Potential?"
Yes I think I do, for I am experiencing myself to be nothing or something as a direct reflection of what I consider.
With regards to time, I have been blessed with so many experiences on this subject, it seems like it will take "A Long Time" for me to delineate them all in my Johnny Raff Chronicles. In my book "An Invitation to WonderWorld" there is a chapter entitled, "Adventures in Time". It tells the story of Barbara and I experiencing many "hours of time" when we only had "20 minutes" to be back on course. (I would by the way love it if you choose to support the project by getting and reading that book. It's available through my continually updated web site at wonderworldonline.com)After my insistence on re-doing OT-II, (after having been enticed off of it because someone considered I needed to do OT-III), I experienced the physical universe flickering on and of like a show running motion picture camera. It was there, then not there, then there, then not there, and I got to personally and directly experience it being created moment to moment to moment.Then I had an experience of simultaneous time, in which I was blessed with the awareness of everything being created in the now. Talk about an expansive view of "present time". After that, I returned to the habitual, human practice, of selecting a tiny portion of all that is, that I then strung out in a linear time stream. I then defined my instantaneous creation of A LINEAR TIME STREAM to be my multi-life history, and thus it was, until I considered it was something else.:mindblow: Later I discovered that, I was a nothing that had unlimited potential, and everything was as I considered or defined it to be.
"Knowest Thou the Meaning of Potential?" Well it seems like I am beginning to know, yet I consider there is much more to know, and so there is, except for "The Times" when I consider there is not. Love, The Magic Thetan.
FoTi
Crusader
Hatshepsut
Crusader
P
Brilliant flash of insight. And I absolutely concur. I have had other flashes myself again since last posting on this. I was looking at the way the centralized power of a life unit or an organism is its 'kernel' so to speak. This term I learned recently applies to running software on a computer too. The ecclectic software embroidered around the kernel of the main program becomes dysfunctional if changes are made not in alignment with core paths of information.
I just read the linked article to Pierre Ethierre's site posted by Jachs99 and I saw similar ideas regarding stabilization of the big being in charge.
This got me a "flash" of some sort involving the idea of "blowing" BTs/clusters/pressure/pain/sen and all that kind of thing...
(note that I have not done any upper level stuff)
But the general thought was that to eliminate, disperse, eject... whatever you might call the "negative gain" part of the processes :confused2: could possibly be doing away with or altering and messing up the nodes, comnnections, entities and what-not that binds the whole composite being that comprises and individual together.
So, consider that perchance a "cluster" (or similar) is actually a sort of protective node containing some set or sets of encoded instructions accumulated on the "time track" that is keeping cell growth on track and replicating appropriately... well, removing it might possibly allow unchecked and unregulated proliferation of said cells.
Ergo - cancer. :confused2:
Excuse me if this seems silly, puerile or repeats thoughts previously advanced - I just wanted to get it out of my universe before it totally "as-ises"
EP
Brilliant flash of insight. And I absolutely concur. I have had other flashes myself again since last posting on this. I was looking at the way the centralized power of a life unit or an organism is its 'kernel' so to speak. This term I learned recently applies to running software on a computer too. The ecclectic software embroidered around the kernel of the main program becomes dysfunctional if changes are made not in alignment with core paths of information.
I just read the linked article to Pierre Ethierre's site posted by Jachs99 and I saw similar ideas regarding stabilization of the big being in charge.
afaceinthecrowd
Gold Meritorious Patron
"Time" for ravings from the resident lunatic.
Carmelo, Rog, Ted, Hats, EP, Leon, TMT, Enthetan, Lakey…this is all gooder that gooder’s good gets good stuff!!
Thanks for the link, Rog…I hadn’t seen that dialogue before…very nice, v-e-r-y n-i-c-e.
In my view, the entire “problem” with the Grade Chart”, “The Bridge”, “’OT’ Sections” and Institutionalized Scn was that El Ron consistently abandoned what would work on some of the people most of the time for what Hisself could work on most of the people some of the time.
IMO, there is no universal “process and processes” but every one of Us in this Universe has their own personal “process and processes”.
I think El Ron knew this…and his “overt”—and this is as big as a biggie gets—was that El Ron was afraid of what would happen to Hisself if some of Us could actually “free” and “know” ourselves and each other...all judgment and decisions had to be within and from Hisself’s “tech” as our "tech", El Ron spoke and wrote, was wrong, invalid, “squirrel”, dangerous .
El Ron knew this because it was Us that were making things happen by our innate intuition, honest observation and sincere desire to “follow our paths” and help others and to “know” WTF “That”, “This” and ‘It” is all about.
El Ron was not “Source Point” of the “Tech”; Hisself was “Receipt Point” of our own, individual “Techs”. From my viewpoint there is no “Universal 'Tech'”; this is a “'Techs Universe”…that’s what were all doing here…sharing our “techs” and it’s the most Gawd awful, wondrously wonderful experience imaginable and someday, somewhere in time—our own individual and separate time—each one of Us will move on and share our “tech”, and the “techs” we’ve learned from others, somewhere else with others…just as we are doing right now at this moment in time.
Whatta wonderful bunch of rouges y’all are…whatta wonderful place to “Be” all of Us are, together, creating.
N.B. "gift" and "gifts" can be supplanted in the above for “tech” and “techs”, wherever seems apropos to you, the reader.
Face
Carmelo, Rog, Ted, Hats, EP, Leon, TMT, Enthetan, Lakey…this is all gooder that gooder’s good gets good stuff!!
Thanks for the link, Rog…I hadn’t seen that dialogue before…very nice, v-e-r-y n-i-c-e.
In my view, the entire “problem” with the Grade Chart”, “The Bridge”, “’OT’ Sections” and Institutionalized Scn was that El Ron consistently abandoned what would work on some of the people most of the time for what Hisself could work on most of the people some of the time.
IMO, there is no universal “process and processes” but every one of Us in this Universe has their own personal “process and processes”.I think El Ron knew this…and his “overt”—and this is as big as a biggie gets—was that El Ron was afraid of what would happen to Hisself if some of Us could actually “free” and “know” ourselves and each other...all judgment and decisions had to be within and from Hisself’s “tech” as our "tech", El Ron spoke and wrote, was wrong, invalid, “squirrel”, dangerous .
El Ron knew this because it was Us that were making things happen by our innate intuition, honest observation and sincere desire to “follow our paths” and help others and to “know” WTF “That”, “This” and ‘It” is all about. El Ron was not “Source Point” of the “Tech”; Hisself was “Receipt Point” of our own, individual “Techs”. From my viewpoint there is no “Universal 'Tech'”; this is a “'Techs Universe”…that’s what were all doing here…sharing our “techs” and it’s the most Gawd awful, wondrously wonderful experience imaginable and someday, somewhere in time—our own individual and separate time—each one of Us will move on and share our “tech”, and the “techs” we’ve learned from others, somewhere else with others…just as we are doing right now at this moment in time.
Whatta wonderful bunch of rouges y’all are…whatta wonderful place to “Be” all of Us are, together, creating.
N.B. "gift" and "gifts" can be supplanted in the above for “tech” and “techs”, wherever seems apropos to you, the reader.
Face
Last edited:
Hatshepsut
Crusader
All this talk about "time" got me reviewing my current view of it.
My view of it has been for quite some time now that: Time is the consideration that conditions will be and events will occur.
Of course, the moment this consideration is projected there is brought into being the limitations it imposes.
Historically, my view is that the above consideration was the first in the sequence regarding time. It brought into being a future from out of an original continuum of existence that exhibited no "time delineation." It was simply all "now."
Following the bringing into being of the will be "future," one could view conditions and events from that position and consider comparative events as "past." And so it goes
Hmmm, and an interesting concept to process it is too, for one can span the whole extravaganza!
RogerB
Thanks Roger. Every time I get lost in my own supposedly intellectual hubbub you remind me where the point of causation really lies.
- Status